2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission
2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission 2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in 2011(cont…)Cases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD 2010 ProvisionsBreachedhe may have to lodge claims against the respondent at the Small ClaimsTribunal. Based on the above, the case was closed.2011/10/04/BC-FTD/256Consumer Qvs. Company UOn 04-10-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Qregarding unwarranted action by Company U. The complainant informedFCC that he was wrongfully terminated by the respondent for Abuse ofOffice when he was confident that he was not guilty of any wrong doing.The Complainant informed that the Council at first had given him an optionto resign or to be terminated and that the matter would be referred to othercompetent authorities for investigation. Once the complaint was lodged,FCC after making its assessment and analysis on the matter, formallyinformed the complainant that FCC did not have provisions under the CCD2010, to handle issues relating to employer & employee disputes and thathe may have to consult the officials from the Ministry of Labour, IndustrialRelations & Employment to discuss his grievances further. Based on theabove the case was closed.No Breach of Commerce CommissionDecree 2010Page111of236
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in 2011(cont…)Cases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD 2010 ProvisionsBreached2011/10/13/BC-FTD/2582011/10/20/BC-FTD/259Consumer Rvs. Company VConsumer Svs. CompanyWOn 13-10-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Ragainst Company V for failing to deliver/deal as per the contractualagreement on the sale of land at Narere, Nasinu. The complainant informedFCC that on 21-04-11, she paid $3,000.00 to the respondent for thepurchase of a block of land in Narere, Nasinu. Due to the delay in thedevelopments of the project, she had written to the respondent requestingfor the refund. The Respondent offered another block of land in Sakoca,Tamavua and stated that a deposit would be transferred and a newagreement would be made on the legal cost that was already paid. A sum of$1000.00 was paid by her to facilitate the above changes. FCC formallywrote to the respondent, informing him of the issue and seeking a response.FCC followed-up with the respondent in regards to the response on theallegations brought by the complainant and FCC was informed that the casehad been settled between the two parties and a copy of the new sales andpurchases agreement would be forwarded to the Commission. On 8-12-11,the Commission made another follow-up with the complainant and wasinformed that the issue had been resolved. Based on this, the case hasbeen closed.On 20-10-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Sagainst Company W for deducting 10% of the total value of goods, whenthey were returned for various reasons. FCC formally wrote to therespondent informing him of the issue and seeking a response. A responsewas received and FCC invited the respondent for a meeting to discuss theirpolicy, where FCC pointed out that their policy was in breach of CCD 2010.The Respondent informed FCC that they would amend their refund policyaccordingly. FCC has been monitoring the trader on this issue. The abovewas conveyed to the complainant and the case was closed.ConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesSection 75, 76 & 77Section 76 & 83Page112of236
- Page 61 and 62: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 63 and 64: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 65 and 66: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 67: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 70 and 71: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 72 and 73: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 74 and 75: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 76 and 77: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 78 and 79: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 80 and 81: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 82 and 83: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 84 and 85: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 86 and 87: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 88 and 89: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 90 and 91: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 92 and 93: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 94 and 95: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 96 and 97: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 98 and 99: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 100 and 101: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 102 and 103: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 104 and 105: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 106 and 107: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 108 and 109: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 110 and 111: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 114 and 115: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 116 and 117: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 118 and 119: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 120 and 121: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 122 and 123: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 124 and 125: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 126 and 127: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 128 and 129: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 130 and 131: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 132 and 133: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 134 and 135: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 136 and 137: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 138 and 139: Table 4: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 140 and 141: Table 4: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 142 and 143: 1.4 Summary of Unfair Trading Activ
- Page 144 and 145: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 146 and 147: Table:6 Cases Successfully Disposed
- Page 148 and 149: Table:6 Cases Successfully Disposed
- Page 150 and 151: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 152 and 153: Table 6: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 154 and 155: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 156 and 157: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 158 and 159: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 160 and 161: Table: 6 Cases Successfully Dispose
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in <strong>2011</strong>(cont…)Cases Resolved in <strong>2011</strong>Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD 2010 ProvisionsBreachedhe may have to lodge claims against the respondent at the Small ClaimsTribunal. Based on the above, the case was closed.<strong>2011</strong>/10/04/BC-FTD/256Consumer Qvs. Company UOn 04-10-11, the <strong>Commission</strong> received a complaint from Consumer Qregarding unwarranted action by Company U. <strong>The</strong> complainant informedFCC that he was wrongfully terminated by the respondent for Abuse ofOffice when he was confident that he was not guilty of any wrong doing.<strong>The</strong> Complainant informed that the Council at first had given him an optionto resign or to be terminated and that the matter would be referred to othercompetent authorities for investigation. Once the complaint was lodged,FCC after making its assessment and analysis on the matter, formallyinformed the complainant that FCC did not have provisions under the CCD2010, to handle issues relating to employer & employee disputes and thathe may have to consult the officials from the Ministry of Labour, IndustrialRelations & Employment to discuss his grievances further. Based on theabove the case was closed.No Breach of <strong>Commerce</strong> <strong>Commission</strong>Decree 2010Page111of236
Change language