Ah I see. I had the impression from the title "scam" that it was completely bogus as in they took the money and did nothing. Still seems a nasty practice especially for genuine unemployed folks needing to find something (as opposed to job hoppers), to extract money from the jobless in such ways.sundaymorningstaple wrote:Won't work. I was in the business for a long time before becoming the HR & Finance Mgr of the SME I am currently working for. In all probability, they were going to temp him to some company. So they charged him an application fee to process the S pass (lots of companies will also act as middlemen for the employer and fill out application forms on their behalf). Therefore the agency charges the job seeker for "form filling". They have provided the service requested, therefore the charges are non-refundable as the service was for making the application. there is, obviously, no way that they can "guarantee" success. The S pass was rejected, but you still have the pay them the processing fees if they signed on the dotted line as that service was provided. Should the application been successful, the job seeker would have signed a contract with the employer and the agency would charge the client a recruitment fee.
willing buyer willing sellerBeeroclock wrote: Ah I see. I had the impression from the title "scam" that it was completely bogus as in they took the money and did nothing. Still seems a nasty practice especially for genuine unemployed folks needing to find something (as opposed to job hoppers), to extract money from the jobless in such ways.
True, although I've said the same previously, and been rebutted that contracts need to be reasonable, and serve the core intention/purpose, to be enforceable. If you recall when we debated the tenant early lease break issue, your thinking seemed quite the opposite there.... I would have pegged you as more of a consumer advocate.ecureilx wrote: willing buyer willing seller
Really ? I am not sure if I should be thrilled to have been identified as a Consumer advocate ?? I dread to admit I am not a consumer advocate ..Beeroclock wrote: True, although I've said the same previously, and been rebutted that contracts need to be reasonable, and serve the core intention/purpose, to be enforceable. If you recall when we debated the tenant early lease break issue, your thinking seemed quite the opposite there.... I would have pegged you as more of a consumer advocate.
The issue is, out of the dozens of flights coming in from Asean countries, more than half the visitors are coming here looking for jobs, and there are micro-blogs for a few nationalities/communities- mainly of countries trying to everything to get the hell out of their country, all trying to tell them what is the best known way to ensure you land a job here fast, and last count, I could see atleast a few dozen, specialising in "EMPLOYMENT ADVICES" .. including how to fly under the radar for ICA purposes etc. etc. No, I can't understand most of the wording but I know what is there ..Beeroclock wrote:
Granted that OP has likely been naive/gullible, but it can happen to the best of us and I also get the impression he has been ripped off / gradually lured in by progressively larger fees, so I remain sympathetic that he might find a way to get some of his money back. It seems unreasonable to charge $900+ for form filing if that's all they did. I still reckon reporting to CASE might be worth a try, I know some businesses can be quite afraid of any such attention and might offer a settlement to avoid it. Also if CASE get enough complaints they might take action to raise awareness and/or regulate against these practices.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests