The Effectiveness of legal and Non- legal Measures in Achieving Justice for Consumers (THEME)
CONSUMER REDRESS AND REMEDIES
Cases:
HP case (2013) - HP was ordered to pay $3 million for making false and misleading representations to customers and retailers regarding
customer guarantee rights. The Court found that HP represented to retailers that it was not liable to compensate the retailer if the retailer
failed to obtain authorisation from HP before giving a consumer a refund or replacement. The Judge decided that the penalty was appropriate
and “reflects an acknowledgment of the seriousness of the conduct.”
ACCC v Bytecard 2013 - Federal court declared that a number of clauses in the Bytecard Pty. Ltd. standard form consumer contracts are unfair
and therefore void following action by the ACCC. ByteCard is an internet service provider, and various clauses of the standard contract were
found unfair. these included; ByteCard was enabled to unilaterally vary the price under an existing contract without providing the customer
with a right to terminate the contract, and ByteCare was enabled to unilaterally terminate the contract at any time without cause or reason,
among others. They created a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations and were not reasonably necessary to protect the
company’s legitimate interests and if applied would cause detriment to the customer.
Kucharski v Air Pacific (2011) - This was an NSW case in the CTTT (now NCAT) where an airline ticket had the words “NON ENDNON REF” on it,
and this meant that the ticket was non refundable, but this was still found to be unfair because it was unclear on the ticket what NON
ENDNON REF meant.
NSW Fair Trading v Mason (2013) (NSW Local Court) - A Lake Macquarie man was prosecuted by NSW Fair Trading for entering into contracts
and taking money for residential building work he never even commenced and for which he had no license. He pleaded guilty in Newcastle
Local Court to two breaches of the Australian Consumer Law for accepting payment and not supplying goods and services, and unlicensed
contracting of residential building work, and for demanding nd receiving payment before commencing work. Outcome - issued with a $27330
fine and was ordered to fully refund the money consumers paid to him.
NSW Fair Trading v Bao Kun Lin (Smart Dollars Pty Ltd) (2013) (NSW Local Court) - Bao Kun Lin, the director of Smart Dollars in Westfield
shopping center at Parramatta was fined over $27000 for selling pig-shaped lighters and liquid-filled yoyos that posed a strangulation risk to
children. The yoyos were permanently banned in Australia and Mr. Lin was warned to stop selling them 10 years prior to the case.
Supre complaints -
, The Effectiveness of legal and Non- legal Measures in Achieving Justice for Consumers (THEME)
ACCC v Prouds (2008)
ACCC v Lux Distributors Pty Ltd (2013)
The Knock Knock Who’s There Campaign (2012-13)
ACCC v Australian Power & Gas (APG) (2013)
ACCC v King Island Meatworks (2012)
PROCESSES and REMEDIES ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Case example and comment on
effectiveness
What does the organisation
do and what powers of
enforcement does it have?
1. Awareness and self Consumers achieve Often, consumers
help protection for knowledge on issues
themselves. of consumer law may
Remedies: Statutory Protections be ill informed.
uphold consumers'
1. Complaints to Suppliers
rights. Businesses
2. Complaints to typically comply (to Consumers often
Manufacturers create customer don’t have direct
loyalty and avoid access to
CONSUMER REDRESS AND REMEDIES
Cases:
HP case (2013) - HP was ordered to pay $3 million for making false and misleading representations to customers and retailers regarding
customer guarantee rights. The Court found that HP represented to retailers that it was not liable to compensate the retailer if the retailer
failed to obtain authorisation from HP before giving a consumer a refund or replacement. The Judge decided that the penalty was appropriate
and “reflects an acknowledgment of the seriousness of the conduct.”
ACCC v Bytecard 2013 - Federal court declared that a number of clauses in the Bytecard Pty. Ltd. standard form consumer contracts are unfair
and therefore void following action by the ACCC. ByteCard is an internet service provider, and various clauses of the standard contract were
found unfair. these included; ByteCard was enabled to unilaterally vary the price under an existing contract without providing the customer
with a right to terminate the contract, and ByteCare was enabled to unilaterally terminate the contract at any time without cause or reason,
among others. They created a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations and were not reasonably necessary to protect the
company’s legitimate interests and if applied would cause detriment to the customer.
Kucharski v Air Pacific (2011) - This was an NSW case in the CTTT (now NCAT) where an airline ticket had the words “NON ENDNON REF” on it,
and this meant that the ticket was non refundable, but this was still found to be unfair because it was unclear on the ticket what NON
ENDNON REF meant.
NSW Fair Trading v Mason (2013) (NSW Local Court) - A Lake Macquarie man was prosecuted by NSW Fair Trading for entering into contracts
and taking money for residential building work he never even commenced and for which he had no license. He pleaded guilty in Newcastle
Local Court to two breaches of the Australian Consumer Law for accepting payment and not supplying goods and services, and unlicensed
contracting of residential building work, and for demanding nd receiving payment before commencing work. Outcome - issued with a $27330
fine and was ordered to fully refund the money consumers paid to him.
NSW Fair Trading v Bao Kun Lin (Smart Dollars Pty Ltd) (2013) (NSW Local Court) - Bao Kun Lin, the director of Smart Dollars in Westfield
shopping center at Parramatta was fined over $27000 for selling pig-shaped lighters and liquid-filled yoyos that posed a strangulation risk to
children. The yoyos were permanently banned in Australia and Mr. Lin was warned to stop selling them 10 years prior to the case.
Supre complaints -
, The Effectiveness of legal and Non- legal Measures in Achieving Justice for Consumers (THEME)
ACCC v Prouds (2008)
ACCC v Lux Distributors Pty Ltd (2013)
The Knock Knock Who’s There Campaign (2012-13)
ACCC v Australian Power & Gas (APG) (2013)
ACCC v King Island Meatworks (2012)
PROCESSES and REMEDIES ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Case example and comment on
effectiveness
What does the organisation
do and what powers of
enforcement does it have?
1. Awareness and self Consumers achieve Often, consumers
help protection for knowledge on issues
themselves. of consumer law may
Remedies: Statutory Protections be ill informed.
uphold consumers'
1. Complaints to Suppliers
rights. Businesses
2. Complaints to typically comply (to Consumers often
Manufacturers create customer don’t have direct
loyalty and avoid access to
