TM EXPLAINS RM800 TRILLION ISSUE - Letter NOT ISSUED by TM, but by debt collection agency

Telekom Malaysia Berhad (TM) refers to the three articles that appeared in the News Straits Times entitled RM800 Trillion Bill! on Page 8, Berita Harian entitled Bil Telefon Lebih RM800 Trillion on Page 7 and Harian Metro entitled Bil TM Rm800 Trilion on Page 18 on 10 April 2006.

TM’s investigation reveals that the complainant requested for disconnection of service on 24 January 2006 and it was terminated the following day. As the complainant had an outstanding amount of RM155.64, his deposit of RM75 was deducted from the amount and to date he still owes TM RM80.64. The final bill that was sent to the customer showed this amount. Hence, TM did not send a bill amounting to RM800 trillion as claimed by the reports in the newspapers.

As part of TM’s normal business procedure, TM has appointed debt collection agencies throughout the whole country to collect its debts when customers fail to pay their bills.

In this case, unfortunately, the letter sent by the particular debt collection agency on 3 April 2006, contained two errors in the namely the address and the amount. The amount stated was RM80.640000000000001. Therefore the typo was the additional 12 zeroes followed by a “1” in the original letter by the debt collection agency.

When the complainant called the agency on 9 April 2006 for an explanation, he was informed that that it was a typo and the complainant was satisfied with the explanation.

TM’s investigation also shows that the letter from the agency states that the amount as RM80.640000000000001, with a full stop between 80 and 64. The typo was the additional 12 zeroes followed by a “1” in the original letter by the debt collection agency. However, the letter that was printed in the media showed RM 80,6,400,000,000,000.01.

TM has since given a stern warning to the particular debt collection agency and is currently awaiting a full report from them.

TM wishes to reiterate that it did not send a bill for RM800 trillion as reported. Instead, the complainant received a letter from the debt collection agency with the typo.