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 ProvisionsBreached2011/06/29/BC-FTD/1632011/07/04//BC-FTD/165Consumer Xvs. CompanyUConsumer Yvs. Company VOn 29-06-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer X,regarding the repair of a Bosch drill which he bought from Company U for$541.00 with 3 months warranty. He informed FCC that the machinestopped working after a week and it was given for repair but it started toemit smoke when it was first used after repair. The machine was given forrepair again and after repairing, Company U asked the complainant to pay$65.00 for repairs but the complainant refused to take the machine back.Consumer X requested Company U to replace the Bosch drill or refund theamount paid for the machine but Company U refused to meet the requests.FCC formally wrote to the respondent informing them of the issue andseeking a response. A response was received informing FCC that thecomplainant was trying to get an old drill repaired under the warranty of anew drill and the complainant was informed about this. The respondent alsoprovided relevant documents to FCC to prove the same. The above wasconveyed to the complainant and the case was closed.On 04-07-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Yregarding the payments for a vehicle that he had bought from Company V.The complainant informed FCC that in 2009, he signed a Bill of Sale for aLPG vehicle from Company V to be used as a taxi. The cost of the vehiclewas $14,332.50 and the total interest was $4,299.75, amounting to$18,632.25 as the total value of the vehicle. In December 2010, ConsumerY was surprised, that without any notice or contact, Company V seized thevehicle. In May 2011, Consumer Y paid $1,700 to release the vehicle fromCompany V. However, in June 2011, theNo Breach of the CommerceCommission Decree 2010No Breach of the CommerceCommission Decree 2010Page73of236
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in 2011(cont…)Cases Resolved in 2011Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD20102011/07/04/BC-FTD/166Consumer Zvs. CompanyWvehicle was again seized by Company V and he was told to pay the balanceamount for the vehicle which was $6,600. FCC formally wrote to therespondent, informing them of the issue and seeking a response. Aresponse was received, informing FCC that under the Consumer Credit Act,Company V can demand for the full sum owed for failing to make payments.They also invited the complainant for further negotiations and proposal toresolve the matter. The above was conveyed to the complainant and thecase was closed.On 04-07-11, the Commission received a complaint from Consumer Zregarding internet broadband pricing by Company W. The Complainantinformed FCC that after the Commission’s directive, Company W reducedthe broadband charges by $4.50 and increased the data cap by 2GB for128k which was not beneficial to all users, because if faster speed andupgrade was required, it would come with an increased cost. FCC after theinvestigation formally wrote to the Complainant, informing him that FCConly regulates the wholesale internet charges and not the retail internetcharges, as the Commission did not have the jurisdiction to control andregulate the retail internet prices at this point in time. The Complainant wasadvised that FCC was monitoring the market .Based on the above, the casewas closed.ProvisionsBreachedConsumerProtection &Unfair Practices Section 84Page74of236
- 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
- Page 72 and 73: 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 112 and 113: 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
Table 2: Cases Successfully Disposed Of in <strong>2011</strong>(cont…)Cases Resolved in <strong>2011</strong>Case Number Case Name Issues Part of CCD2010<strong>2011</strong>/07/04/BC-FTD/166Consumer Zvs. CompanyWvehicle was again seized by Company V and he was told to pay the balanceamount for the vehicle which was $6,600. FCC formally wrote to therespondent, informing them of the issue and seeking a response. Aresponse was received, informing FCC that under the Consumer Credit Act,Company V can demand for the full sum owed for failing to make payments.<strong>The</strong>y also invited the complainant for further negotiations and proposal toresolve the matter. <strong>The</strong> above was conveyed to the complainant and thecase was closed.On 04-07-11, the <strong>Commission</strong> received a complaint from Consumer Zregarding internet broadband pricing by Company W. <strong>The</strong> Complainantinformed FCC that after the <strong>Commission</strong>’s directive, Company W reducedthe broadband charges by $4.50 and increased the data cap by 2GB for128k which was not beneficial to all users, because if faster speed andupgrade was required, it would come with an increased cost. FCC after theinvestigation formally wrote to the Complainant, informing him that FCConly regulates the wholesale internet charges and not the retail internetcharges, as the <strong>Commission</strong> did not have the jurisdiction to control andregulate the retail internet prices at this point in time. <strong>The</strong> Complainant wasadvised that FCC was monitoring the market .Based on the above, the casewas closed.ProvisionsBreachedConsumerProtection &Unfair Practices Section 84Page74of236
Change language