Battler Russell Dalrymple brands ‘win’ in Civil and Administrative Tribunal a ‘waste of time and money’

NSW Fair Trading is “determined to take every action” against one of NSW’s top consumer enemies — but try telling Russell Dalrymple and daughter Emily.

Russell Dalrymple and his daughter Emily Dalrymple have been fighting for a refund from Luxury Home Products, a company run b...

MORE needs to be done to stop one of NSW’s top consumer enemies: Goce “George” Sekuloski.

NSW Fair Trading commissioner Rod Stowe says he is “determined to take every action” against Mr Sekuloski — but try telling that to people such as Russell Dalrymple and daughter Emily.

Last year Mr Dalrymple, of West Wyalong, paid Mr Sekuloski’s Luxury Home Products $1220 for a generator for his mobile home.

Mr Sekuloski’s business sent the wrong generator. Mr Dalrymple was told to return it at his expense. He did, at a cost of $70.

But Luxury Home Products sent nothing back. Each time Mr Dalrymple rang, he got a different person by a different name. But the voice sounded the same.

“They just bullshitted me,” Mr Dalrymple told Public Defender this week.

Public Defender has had the same experience pursuing Mr Sekuloski’s companies on behalf of other readers.

In this case, Emily Dalrymple was determined her father, a disability pensioner, would not be ripped off on his first internet purchase.

She contacted NSW Fair Trading. The matter was referred to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal, now known as the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Mr Sekuloski was a no-show at the hearing. He usually is.

“We won the case and I’m thinking, ‘Unreal’,” Mr Dalrymple said. He received a letter saying the NSW Sheriff would be sent to get his money back, or goods that could be sold to cover what he was owed.

But the sheriff could not find Mr Sekuloski.

Ms Dalrymple said: “You win — but it doesn’t mean you’ve won.”

Mr Dalrymple, still unable to use his mobile home, said: “Well, what in the hell did Fair Trading go through this process for? What a waste of time and money.”

Wall catalyst for changing policies

LAST week’s story about reader Ellen Karas hitting a brick wall with her insurer has triggered a push for change within the upper echelons of the industry.

Public Defender has been asked to provide further examples of shoddy treatment so that insurers can use them to workshop how they can do things better. It’s a welcome response.

Although Mrs Karas would like the bricks in her repaired wall replaced with ones that are a close match, she’s keener to see others avoid the same experience she’s been put through over the past 18 months.

Here’s hoping what’s happened to her can be a catalyst for change.