Mother Refuses To Pay Tutor, Claims He Unprepared
Recently, an incident involving a parent’s refusal to make payments to her children’s tutor made rounds on Facebook.
The tutor, NUS student Khoo Wei Ping had taken to the social media platform to air his frustrations after repeatedly being denied payment by Ms Haryati Kasim – the owner of a wedding business – who has since taken down her counter post online.
More information can be found from our coverage of the story here.
Since then, Mr Khoo has approached MustShareNews to clarify his side of the story and shed light on additional details.
Here is what he said.
Refuting Ms Kasim’s claims
In her post, Ms Kasim had accused Mr Khoo of being an unqualified tutor who was unprepared to conduct lessons.
Her accusations include:
- Lack of research on lesson material on the first day
- Uncertainty on what to do at throughout the class
- Inability to improve after being given feedback
However, Mr Khoo has informed us that what she said was inaccurate, and that she had only disclosed partial screenshots and not revealed the entire story.
Explaining his rationale for the supposed irresponsible attitude, the NUS student had the following to say:
On the first day of lesson, I would of course need to ask what I should do, since I have no idea what the children are good or bad in, or where specifically they need help in.
Furthermore, he mentioned that he had followed exactly what was requested and that she hadn’t made repeated reminders as claimed.
There was no “multiple feedback and reminders”. She asked me to make worksheets at some point and I did exactly that.
Additionally, Ms Kasim’s stated that at one point, her 11 year old daughter had informed her that having Mr Khoo was a tutor was unnecessary as he was simply handing her assessments to do.
Instead of actually tutoring.
This was what he had to say:
I would of course need to ask the 11-year-old what I should teach her, since we only had 3 lessons together and two of which were spent on English oral. There was no way for me to know what she needed more.
Do you accept his explanation?
Nothing to do with bad reviews
Then came the issue of Ms Kasim’s wedding business being affected negatively as a result of the controversy.
According to her, Mr Khoo had influenced his friends to intentionally provide her business with a bad rating due to her refusal to make payment. Some even threatened to spread word about boycotting her wedding services.
Since the incident, he has apologised for getting her business involved in the saga and has vowed to deleted any further comments that disclose their name.
However, Mr Khoo maintains that not once did he encourage his friends – or anyone else for that matter – to intentionally rate her business badly.
I did not incite anyone to leave bad reviews or to message her privately in my post or elsewhere. The only thing I did was to put her business name in the post, which has been removed rather long ago (when the post was about a hundred shares).
Amongst those that actually did, only two were actually friends of Mr Khoo’s.
Whom he had already told to remove their rating.
According to his conversation with Ms Kasim’s husband.
Remaining payment owed
Lastly, Mr Khoo would like to clarify that while the initial $100 had been paid, a total sum of $102.50 is still owed.
As opposed to $92 which we initially reported.
This includes the following:
- $92.50 tuition fee
- $10 claim fee
Of which can be found in the court order above.
Your thoughts on the incident
Now that you’ve a better understanding Mr Khoo’s side of the story, what do you think of the entire incident?
Do you still believe that Ms Kasim was right in withholding payment or does Mr Khoo have a legitimate gripe in this case?
Let us know what you think in the comments below — but leave her wedding services out of this.
Featured image from Khoo Wei Ping.