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 ProvisionsBreached2011/02/02/BC-FTD/242011/02/02/BC-FTD/252011/02/04/BC-FTD/26ComplaintagainstCompany AConsumer Tvs. Company BConsumer Uvs. Company COn 02-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer S,against Company A in regards to the selling of sweets which did not clearlyshow the expiry date. Once the complaint was lodged, FCC tried to contactthe managing director of the company and FCC came to know that thematter was before the Fiji Police Force and they were investigating. Theabove was conveyed to the complainant and the case was closed.On 02-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Tagainst Company B. The complainant alleged that his name was forwardedto the Data Bureau by Company T claiming default of payment. TheComplainant bought a brush cutter from Company B Nausori on hirepurchase for his brother. Payments went well but slowed down in the lastfew months and the brush cutter was repossessed with arrears amountingto $588.36. Upon receipt of the complaint, FCC mediated the matter andthe complainant’s name was cleared from the Data Bureau.On 04-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Uagainst Company C based in Nausori, regarding the sale of expiredproducts (Mayonnaise 375g). The complaint was lodged with anotherorganisation but no further action was taken and the complaint was referredto the Director of the Central Board of Health. On 12-12-11, theCommission followed up with Ministry of Health and was informed that thematter had been referred to them and they had investigated the matter. TheComplainant was informed on the above and the case was closed.ConsumerProtection &Unfair PracticesConsumerProtection &Unfair PracticesConsumerProtection &Unfair PracticesSection 87Section 76Section 87 JPage21of236
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in 2011(cont…)Cases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD 2010 ProvisionsBreached2011/02/09/BC-FTD/282011/02/08/BC-FTD/29Consumer Vvs. Company CConsumer Wvs. Company DOn 09-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Vagainst Company C for an unjustified charge of $50 for returning an enginewhich he bought but did not use. Consumer V bought an engine fromCompany C. However, when he fitted the engine, it was not functioning. Hecomplained to the company and requested for a refund but they chargedhim $50 for freight. Once the complaint was lodged, FCC formally wrote toCompany C, informing them of the issue and seeking a response. Aresponse was received; informing FCC that the $50 was deducted as afreight cost and it was advised to the complainant before the sale wasmade. The above was conveyed to complainant and the case was closed.The Commission received a complaint from Consumer W against CompanyD. Consumer W engaged Company D to have some electrical workcompleted at the directors residence including the installation of an electricgate but the job was not completed. Once the complaint was lodged, FCCformally wrote to the respondent informing him of the issue and seeking aresponse. A response was received; informing FCC that Company D wouldcomplete the work within the next 2 weeks. After 2 weeks, FCC made anofficial visit to inspect the work and found out that the work was notcompleted. FCC then invited both parties to the Commission for mediation.During the mediation, the respondent informed the Commission that thecomplainant had not paid any labour costs to him, to which FCC requestedthe complainant to deposit a sum of $1500.00 with FCC. The respondentalso agreed to complete the work within next 2 weeks. Later thecomplainant informed FCC that the respondent had failed to complete thework as was agreed. On 11-08-11, the total sum of $1,500.00 was returnedto the complainant and was informed that he may lodge a claim with SCTas they did not have any written agreement to substantiate their claims.ConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesSection 75Section 84Page22of236
- 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: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 20 and 21: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 24 and 25: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 26 and 27: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 28 and 29: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 31 and 32: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 33 and 34: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 35 and 36: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 37 and 38: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 39 and 40: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 41 and 42: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 43 and 44: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 45 and 46: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 47 and 48: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 49 and 50: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 51 and 52: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 53 and 54: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 55 and 56: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 57 and 58: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- Page 59 and 60: Table 2: Cases Successfully Dispose
- 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
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 ProvisionsBreached<strong>2011</strong>/02/09/BC-FTD/28<strong>2011</strong>/02/08/BC-FTD/29Consumer Vvs. Company CConsumer Wvs. Company DOn 09-02-11, the <strong>Commission</strong> received a complaint from Consumer Vagainst Company C for an unjustified charge of $50 for returning an enginewhich he bought but did not use. Consumer V bought an engine fromCompany C. However, when he fitted the engine, it was not functioning. Hecomplained to the company and requested for a refund but they chargedhim $50 for freight. Once the complaint was lodged, FCC formally wrote toCompany C, informing them of the issue and seeking a response. Aresponse was received; informing FCC that the $50 was deducted as afreight cost and it was advised to the complainant before the sale wasmade. <strong>The</strong> above was conveyed to complainant and the case was closed.<strong>The</strong> <strong>Commission</strong> received a complaint from Consumer W against CompanyD. Consumer W engaged Company D to have some electrical workcompleted at the directors residence including the installation of an electricgate but the job was not completed. Once the complaint was lodged, FCCformally wrote to the respondent informing him of the issue and seeking aresponse. A response was received; informing FCC that Company D wouldcomplete the work within the next 2 weeks. After 2 weeks, FCC made anofficial visit to inspect the work and found out that the work was notcompleted. FCC then invited both parties to the <strong>Commission</strong> for mediation.During the mediation, the respondent informed the <strong>Commission</strong> that thecomplainant had not paid any labour costs to him, to which FCC requestedthe complainant to deposit a sum of $1500.00 with FCC. <strong>The</strong> respondentalso agreed to complete the work within next 2 weeks. Later thecomplainant informed FCC that the respondent had failed to complete thework as was agreed. On 11-08-11, the total sum of $1,500.00 was returnedto the complainant and was informed that he may lodge a claim with SCTas they did not have any written agreement to substantiate their claims.ConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesSection 75Section 84Page22of236
Change language