2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table: 6 Cases Successfully Disposed Of - Northern DivisionCases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD20102011/01/14 –FTDN 22011/01/19 –FTDN32011/01/19 –FTDN42011/01/24 –FTDN6Consumer Pvs. CompanyWConsumer Qvs. CompanyXConsumer Rvs. CompanyYConsumer Svs. CompanyZOn 14 th January, 2011, Consumer P lodged a complaint against CompanyW for not attending to electric faults that caused his Refrigerator and DVDDeck to malfunction. Company W responded that Consumer P’s neutral linetap for the customer service main wire was corroded. The corrosion wasrepaired by Company W. Consumer P was notified of Company W’sresponse and advised about the cause of the damage sustained to hisRefrigerator and DVD Deck and the matter was closed.On 19 th January 2011, Consumer Q lodged a complaint against Company Xfor not replacing his defective shoe. Investigations revealed that ConsumerQ was already provided with a replacement pair of shoes, and the shoes inthe complaint were the same ones replaced. Legal opinion from HQrevealed that there was no warranty or guarantee on the shoes. ConsumerQ was advised accordingly and the matter was closed.On 19 th January, 2011, Consumer R lodged a complaint against Company Yfor not refunding his money for a rim he had already returned to Company Y.Upon mediation, Company Y refunded the money to Consumer R.On 24 th January, 2011, Consumer S lodged a complaint against Company Zfor an increased Company Z Bill. The case was resolved upon reviewing theCompany Z Bill since a normal reading was taken by Company Z indetermining the bill. Consumer S was advised that if her monthly usage wasmore than 75 units, then her bill would be computed at $0.3484 per kwh. Awritten response was provided to Consumer S.ConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPractice andDivision 1 –WarrantyConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeProvisionsBreachedSection 76 & 84.Sections 76, 83& 114Section 75Section 76 & 84Page143of236
Table 6: Cases Successfully Disposed Of - Northern DivisionCases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Case Details2011/01/26 –FTDN72011/02/07 –FTDN82011/02/16–FTDN10Consumer Tvs. CompanyAConsumer Uvs. CompanyBConsumer Vvs. CompanyCOn 26 th January, 2011, Consumer T lodged a complaint against Company Afor an increased Company A Bill. The case was resolved upon reviewing theCompany A Bill since a normal reading was taken by Company A indetermining the bill. Consumer T was advised if her monthly usage wasmore than 75 units, then her bill would be computed at $0.3484 per kwh. Awritten response was provided to Consumer T.On 7 th February, 2011, Consumer U lodged a complaint against Company Bfor being charged $0.3484 for zero kwh and imposed a domestic minimumcharge of $3.43. Discussions with Company B’s Labasa Branch revealedthat if the customer was not using the power supply, then the customercould inform Company B and Company B could disconnect the powersupply. The Complainant was informed of the reasons why Company B waslaying out Domestic Minimum charges for the non-use of power supply.On 16 th February, 2011, Consumer V lodged a complaint against CompanyC (a survey technician) for not surveying his land although Consumer V hadmade all the necessary payments.Company C confirmed to the Commission that he was willing to do the job;however he stated he could not specify a timeframe. The survey job asreported by Company C was under progress. The Case has been mediatedand closed.Provisions ofCCD2010ConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeConsumerProtection &UnfairPracticeSectionsBreachedSection 76 & 84Section 76 & 84Section 76 & 84Page144of236
Page 2:
LETTER TO THE MINISTERHonorable Aiy
Page 9 and 10:
5. Legal DepartmentThe department
Page 11 and 12:
1.0 FAIR TRADING DEPARTMENT1.1 Over
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1: FTD Cases - Breakdown in
Page 15:
Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
Page 142 and 143: 1.4 Summary of Unfair Trading Activ
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 162 and 163: 2.2 RENT SECTIONRent Section is a d
Page 164 and 165: Figure 5: House Conditions e.g. lea
Page 166: 2.5 ACTIVITIES HIGHLIGHTSThe table
Page 169 and 170: Table 11: Rent Cases Resolved -2011
Page 189 and 190: Table 11: Rent Cases Resolved-2011C
Page 195 and 196:
Table 11: Rent Cases Resolved-2011N
Page 197 and 198:
Table 12: Summary of Steel Industry
Page 199:
3.2 Ex Factory Wholesale Rebar Pric
Page 202 and 203:
3.4 ElectricityDuring the period, t
Page 204 and 205:
Table 16: Summary of Telecommunicat
Page 206 and 207:
Table 16: Summary of Telecommunicat
Page 208 and 209:
Table 17: Summary of Marina, Airpor
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Table: 18 Investigations and Resear
Page 216 and 217:
Table: 19 Determinations and Price
Page 218 and 219:
Table:20 Petroleum Re etail Price-2
Page 221 and 222:
4.7 Ex-factory Wholesale Price of G
Page 223 and 224:
Table: 24 Summaries of Inspections
Page 226:
Table: 25 Summary of Inspections -
Page 230 and 231:
5.0 Legal Department5.1 OverviewThe
Page 232 and 233:
Table: 32 Number of Prosecutions fo
Page 234:
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
show all

2011 Annual Report - The Commerce Commission

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?