Boss accuses phone accessory shop of overcharging her maid
She was infuriated after her maid had to pay almost half the value of her mobile device for a defective screen protector
A domestic worker’s employer has accused a shop in a Singaporean shopping center of not only selling the maid a defective screen protector for her mobile phone, but grossly overcharging for it as well.
On Sunday, Denise Han warned in a Facebook post that employers and their workers should not patronize the shop in Lucky Plaza after her maid was charged S$145 (US$110) for a tempered-glass screen protector that was chipped, Lianhe Wanbao (Singapore) reported. The phone itself was only worth around S$310, and a quality screen protector should have only cost around S$20.
The Facebook post included pictures of a receipt issued by a shop called EZ Advance Trading Enterprise and the so-called “quality” tempered-glass protector with an obvious chip on its edge.
The newspaper learned from the 37-year-old employer that her maid, whose nationality was not mentioned, had visited the shop in the afternoon inquiring about the availability of a replacement for the worn-out screen protector on her Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus device.
The shop assistant said it was possible to replace it right away, and adhered the new protector on to her smartphone without first telling her the price.
The maid was shocked when she was issued a bill for S$145 for the screen protector, which she understood normally cost no more than S$20. The shop did provide her with a one-year warranty, however.
Since the new screen protector was already attached to the device, the maid had no choice but to bear the cost. When she told her boss what had happened, Han was infuriated.
On Monday, a reporter visited the shop on Basement Level 1 of the shopping center and met the 43-year-old shop owner, who said he needed more time to investigate the incident, as he had not been present at the time of the sale.
He said making the accusation online was unfair to him and his shop, and he might consider legal action. However, he also said he was willing to issue the maid a full refund if the employer first took down her Facebook post.