A STOMPer tried to get his $250 deposit back from a modeling agency after he paid the owner to get his portfolio done, but was unable to do so.
The agency owner had refused his claim, as the former had stamped the words 'NON-REFUNDABLE' on the receipt after the NETS transaction was approved.
The STOMPer had wanted his money back as he felt the operations were suspect; he was made to have his test shots taken without being made-up. Worse, he discovered that the owner of the agency had four other companies listed in his name, where one was a debt collection company.
Recounted the STOMPer, in the email sent:
"I saw an advertisement in the newspaper, looking for fresh faces for modeling assignments. I went to the agency and it is a very small and run-down company with only two staff.
"A middle-aged man interviewed me and commented that I have the perfect look for his modeling assignments and wanted me to take up a portfolio of S$1,000/- before he can coordinate assignments for me.
"I paid a deposit of S$250 for the portfolio and was issued a receipt after fixing a photo shoot date for my portfolio. The man stamped on the receipt that indicated a non-refundable deposit policy ONLY AFTER the NETS transaction is approved.
"I was not informed about the non-refundable policy before my payment nor even during the interview. The worse part is, the non-refundable policy information is not even imprinted on the receipt!
"He then proceeded to take 10 over shots of me. He claimed that those are just test shots and will be offered to me for free. The shots are taken without any makeup and hairdo. It was raining on that day and I have to take the test shots despite the fact that I was drenched. This appeared absurd to me as it is totally unprofessional of a modeling agency to do that."
The sender then decided to conduct a check on his own about the company as he discovered the receipt given to him bore a different name from that which he had gone to after he left the agency.
"I was shocked to realise that both were owned by the same and that he has a total of 5 registered companies under his name. One of the agencies is even registered as a debt collection service company.
"On that same day, I wanted to withdraw my application with the agency and wanted a refund of my S$250. He refused. I felt cheated and proceed to bring the case to court.
"The owner not only refused the $250 refund, but also demanded that I paid up the balance of $750/- as he has developed my test shots out in over 40 prints. He claimed that those pictures are my portfolio pictures and since they are developed out in prints, I have to compensate him for that.
"This is totally ridiculous! Initially, I was told that those are only test shots offered to me for free and now he claimed them to be my portfolio pictures! I have no choice but to feel that the whole incident is after all a scam.
"I heard news about the modeling industry and that I fully understand the necessity of a model's portfolio in order for the model agent to procure modeling assignments for the model. It is however, important for me to invest my portfolio in a credible agency.
"I paid a price to learn my experience and I hope that you can report my case to the public so as to prevent more people from falling into the same situation and victimised."
0 comments:
Post a Comment