25-06-2025
RM25,000 car repair claim is thrown out
Published on: Wednesday, June 25, 2025
Published on: Wed, Jun 25, 2025
By: Crystal E Hermenegildus Text Size: According to the facts of the case, the claimant, Mohd Khaireez Abd Aziz, had sent his Toyota Hilux Vigo to the respondent, Henry Chong Vui Loong of Mercury Auto Service Centre, for an overhaul service on Nov 15, 2022. Kota Kinabalu: The Consumer Claims Tribunal has rejected a claim of RM25,000 filed by a vehicle owner over dissatisfaction with car repair services. Tribunal President Salmi Zalinah Abdul Rahim said the repeated mechanical issues were not caused by negligence but by external factors beyond the repair shop's control. She made the decision after evaluating witness statements, photos, WhatsApp conversations and supporting documents submitted by both parties. According to the facts of the case, the claimant, Mohd Khaireez Abd Aziz, had sent his Toyota Hilux Vigo to the respondent, Henry Chong Vui Loong of Mercury Auto Service Centre, for an overhaul service on Nov 15, 2022. The repairs were completed on Dec 22, 2023, with the claimant making a full payment of RM11,608 before collecting the vehicle. However, on April 15, 2024, the claimant discovered an oil leak in the engine and returned the vehicle to the respondent's workshop on April 17, 2024.
Advertisement The respondent diagnosed a turbo failure and a quotation of RM12,460 for the repair was later issued and paid for by the claimant on Nov 27, 2024. On March 25, 2025, the claimant once again noticed an oil leak and brought the vehicle back to the workshop. Dissatisfied with the repeated issues, the claimant demanded a refund of RM25,000 and the return of several car parts allegedly disposed of without his consent, including the turbo and intercooler. However, Salmi found that the repairs had been discussed and agreed upon by both parties, including the cost estimates and replacement parts. The claimant had even expressed satisfaction during the process, as evidenced by messages such as 'puas hati, bro' and 'good job.' Salmi also said that the respondent had carried out some repairs free of charge and had advised the claimant against driving practices such as racing or high-revving, which could have contributed to the recurring damage. Furthermore, she said the timeline between each breakdown suggested the damage was not directly related to the initial repairs. 'In this case, the damage has been proven by the respondent to be due to external factors and not negligence on their part,' said Salmi. 'The respondent had made multiple repair efforts, at times at their own expense.' * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available.
Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
