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 ProvisionsBreached2011/02/22/BC-FTD/372011/02/23/BC-FTD/38Consumer Gvs. Company PConsumer Hvs. Company QOn 22-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Gagainst Company P for unfairly deducting a sum of $200 from a refund of$500. Consumer G bought a PTO pump from the respondent Company inSeptember 2010. He returned the product and was issued with a credit notefor $500 which he could use to purchase parts. On 21-02-11, he requestedfor a cash refund but was only given 60% of the total amount owed to him.FCC mediated the matter and the respondent company refunded another$200 to the complainant and a settlement was signed and the matter wasclosed.On 23-02-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Hagainst Company Q. The Commission was informed that the Complainanttopped up his flash net for $4 and after only 4 minutes the credit was usedup. FCC formally wrote to Company Q, informing them of the issue andseeking a response on the matter. A response was received, informing FCCthat; (1) Prepay Flash net charging was not based on how much time wasspent browsing, rather it was based on the Data Quota allocated to theaccount based on the recharge value, (2) Any recharge done via top up ofless than $5 would result in a much lesser data quota, i.e. at the rate of1MB for $1, but had the complainant done a normal recharge of $5, hewould have received 100 MB of data quota. The above was conveyed tothe complainant and the case was closed.ConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesConsumerProtection&UnfairPracticesSection 75Section 84Page26of236