Consumer Protection Act

Mars

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
11,452
Reaction score
1,149
Location
Cape Town
Anyone familliar with the new consumer protection act?
It's ballistic! For example, if you sell a power supply and the thing goes faulty and shocks someone, you are liable as the seller. You can be sued to pay for damages. The damages can be made to include such things as emotional trauma.

My favourite part of this choker of an act is that the government is EXEMPT. That's right. It doesn't apply to any government department!
 
I had a .pdf copy somewhere but I'm struggling to find it. Should be on my home PC.

Still need to go through it for work purposes as people are always quoting it and threatening us at work.

The little that I read through seems like bollocks.
Yes as consumers we need to be protected from unfair practices but businesses need to be protected as well.
 
As a consumer, I love it.

One of my favourite parts is, IIRC, that a supplier must pay for shipping, if a product is faulty and is covered under the act. I'm not sure, but I think that means that Pick & Pay has to collect any faulty veggies they sell, and replace them at their cost. This is going to be such fun.

The best part, again IIRC, is that consumers don't have to fight their own battles. The tribunal fights on their behalf; all they do is lay a complaint.

Can't wait.
 
Anyone familliar with the new consumer protection act?
It's ballistic! For example, if you sell a power supply and the thing goes faulty and shocks someone, you are liable as the seller. You can be sued to pay for damages. The damages can be made to include such things as emotional trauma.

My favourite part of this choker of an act is that the government is EXEMPT. That's right. It doesn't apply to any government department!

As a consumer, I love it.

One of my favourite parts is, IIRC, that a supplier must pay for shipping, if a product is faulty and is covered under the act. I'm not sure, but I think that means that Pick & Pay has to collect any faulty veggies they sell, and replace them at their cost. This is going to be such fun.

The best part, again IIRC, is that consumers don't have to fight their own battles. The tribunal fights on their behalf; all they do is lay a complaint.

Can't wait.

where your information come from? :confused:

I read the whole act, it is nothing similar of what you said.

Please enlighten me with more details information about that if you can. Thank you. :)
 
Last edited:
Of course the government is exempt - if they weren't, everyone would stop paying rates and taxes. :p
 
where your information come from? :confused:

I read the whole act, it is nothing similar of what you said.

Please enlighten me with more details information about that if you can. Thank you. :)

Section 55 and 56

(2) Within six months after the delivery of any goods to a consumer, the consumer
may return the goods to the supplier, without penalty and at the supplier’s risk and
expense, if the goods fail to satisfy the requirements and standards contemplated in
section 55, and the supplier must, at the direction of the consumer, either—
(a) repair or replace the failed, unsafe or defective goods; or
(b) refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer, for the goods.

Any more advice will be billed at my usual rates.:)
 
Section 55 and 56



Any more advice will be billed at my usual rates.:)

Consumer’s rights to safe, good quality goods
55. (1) This section does not apply to goods bought at an auction, as contemplated in section 45.
(2) Except to the extent contemplated in subsection (6), every consumer has a right to receive goods that—
(a) are reasonably suitable for the purposes for which they are generally intended for;
(b) are of good quality, in good working order and free of any defects;
(c) will be useable and durable for a reasonable period of time having regard to the use to which they would normally be put and to all the surrounding circumstances of their supply; and
(d) comply with any applicable standards set under the Standards Act, 1993 (Act No. 29 of 1993) or any other public regulation.
(3) In addition to the right set out in subsection (2)(a), if a consumer has specifically informed the supplier of the particular purpose for which the consumer wishes to acquire any goods, or the use to which the consumer intends to apply those goods, and the supplier –
(a) ordinarily offers to supply such goods; or
(b) acts in a manner consistent with being knowledgeable about the use of those goods,
137
the consumer has a right to expect that the goods are reasonably suitable for the specific purpose that the consumer has indicated.
(4) In determining whether any particular goods satisfied the requirements of subsection (2) or (3), all of the circumstances of the supply of those goods must be considered, including but not limited to –
(a) the manner in which, and the purposes for which, the goods were marketed, packaged and displayed, the use of any trade description or mark, any instructions for, or warnings with respect to the use of the goods;
(b) the range of things that might reasonably be anticipated to be done with or in relation to the goods; and
(c) the time when the goods were produced and supplied.
(5) For greater certainty in applying subsection (4) –
(a) it is irrelevant whether a product failure or defect was latent or patent, or whether it could have been detected by a consumer before taking delivery of the goods; and
(b) a product failure or defect may not be inferred in respect of particular goods solely on the grounds that better goods have subsequently become available from the same or any other producer or supplier.
(6) Subsection (2) (a) and (b) do not apply to a transaction if the consumer—
(a) has been expressly informed that particular goods were offered in a specific
138
condition; and
(b) has expressly agreed to accept the goods in that condition, or knowingly acted in a manner consistent with accepting the goods in that condition.
Implied warranty of quality
56. (1) In any transaction or agreement pertaining to the supply of goods to a consumer there is an implied provision that the producer or importer, the distributor and the retailer each warrant that the goods comply with the requirements and standards contemplated in section 55, except to the extent that those goods have been altered contrary to the instructions, or after leaving the control, of the producer or importer, a distributor or the retailer, as the case may be.
(2) Within six months after the delivery of any goods to a consumer, the consumer may return the goods to the supplier, without penalty and at the supplier’s risk and expense, if the goods fail to satisfy the requirements and standards contemplated in section 55, and the supplier must either –
(a) repair or replace the failed, unsafe or defective goods; or
(b) refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer for the goods,
at the option of the supplier, subject to subsection (3).
(3) If a supplier elects in terms of subsection (2) to repair any particular goods or any component of any such goods, and within three months after
139
that repair, the failure, defect or unsafe feature has not been remedied, or a further failure, defect or unsafe feature is discovered, the supplier must—
(a) replace the goods; or
(b) refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer for the goods.
(4) The implied warranty imposed by subsection (1), and the right to return goods set out in subsection (2) are each in addition to—
(a) any other implied warranty or condition imposed by the common law, this Act or any other public regulation; and
(b) any express warranty or condition stipulated by the producer or importer, distributor or retailer, as the case may be.

much better for looking a bigger picture rather than small paragraph. :)

you want me to bill you as well? :D
 

Won't say no.

if you look at the whole act, I don't think you can claim your "vegatable" or "fault power supply" for damages. :D

Don't see why not. Even veggies must comply with S 55, and if they don't, I can request recourse in terms of S 56. Not that I'm particularly worried about vrot fruit and veggies. With a lot of products the shipping costs to return the product are more than the repair, say, a faulty part inside a TV - R 20 circuit board, R 300 shipping to and from the repairer (or R 2 000, if I have to take time out of my schedule to drive to Midrand or Sandton). If a retailer supplies me with crap after the act is in effect, I'm going to insist that he collects.
 
Won't say no.



Don't see why not. Even veggies must comply with S 55, and if they don't, I can request recourse in terms of S 56. Not that I'm particularly worried about vrot fruit and veggies. With a lot of products the shipping costs to return the product are more than the repair, say, a faulty part inside a TV - R 20 circuit board, R 300 shipping to and from the repairer (or R 2 000, if I have to take time out of my schedule to drive to Midrand or Sandton). If a retailer supplies me with crap after the act is in effect, I'm going to insist that he collects.

20. (1) This section is in addition to and not in substitution for —
(a) the right to return unsafe or defective goods, contemplated in section 56; or
(b) any other right in law between a supplier and consumer to return goods and receive a refund.
(2) Subject to subsections (3) to (6), the consumer may return goods to the supplier, and receive a full refund of any consideration paid for those goods, if the supplier has delivered—
(a) goods to the consumer in terms of an agreement arising out of direct marketing, and the consumer has rescinded that agreement during the cooling off period, in accordance with section 16;
(b) goods that the consumer did not have an opportunity to examine before delivery, and the consumer has rejected delivery of those goods for any of the reasons contemplated in section 19(5);
70
(c) a mixture of goods, and the consumer has refused delivery of any of those goods, as contemplated in section 19(8); or
(d) goods intended to satisfy a particular purpose communicated to the supplier as contemplated in section 55(3), and within 10 business days after delivery to the consumer, the goods have been found to be unsuitable for that particular purpose.
(3) Subsection (2) does not apply with respect to any goods if—
(a) for reasons of public health or otherwise, a public regulation prohibits the return of those goods to a supplier once they have been supplied to, or at the direction of, a consumer; or
(b) after having been supplied to or at the direction of the consumer, the goods have been partially or entirely disassembled, physically altered, permanently installed, affixed, attached, joined or added to, blended or combined with, or embedded within, other goods or property.
(4) Goods returnable in terms of—
(a) subsection (2)(a) must be returned to the supplier at the consumer’s risk and expense, or
(b) subsection (2)(b) to (d) must be returned to the supplier at the supplier’s risk and expense,
within 10 business days after delivery to the consumer.
(5) Upon return of any goods in terms of this section, the supplier
71
must refund to the consumer the price paid for the goods, less any amount that may be charged in terms of subsection (6).
(6) In determining the right of a supplier to impose a charge contemplated in subsection (5), if any goods returned to the supplier in terms of this section are –
(a) in the original unopened packaging, the supplier may not charge the consumer any amount in respect of the goods;
(b) in their original condition and re-packaged in their original packaging, the supplier may charge the consumer a reasonable amount for—
(i) use of the goods during the time they were in the consumer’s possession, unless they are goods that are ordinarily consumed or depleted by use, and no such consumption or depletion has occurred; or
(ii) any consumption or depletion of the goods, unless that consumption or depletion is limited to a reasonable amount necessary to determine whether the goods were acceptable to the consumer; or
(c) in any other case, the supplier may charge the consumer a reasonable amount –
(i) as contemplated in paragraph (b); and
(ii) for necessary restoration costs to render the goods fit for re-stocking, unless, having regard to the nature of the goods, and the manner in which they were packaged, it was necessary for the consumer to
72
destroy the packaging in order to determine whether the goods—
(aa) conformed to the description or sample provided, in the case of goods that had not been examined by the consumer before delivery, as contemplated in subsection (2)(b); or
(bb) were fit for the intended purpose, in a case contemplated in subsection (2)(d).

(I don't have time to highlight, find it yourself)

please read it carefully, don't only read "part" of the section.
 
Religion isn't a consumer product, so no.

Sorry to bring this up again this thread, bit I dissagree.

Religion sells a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, purpose of the universe, et al and marketing is done by any of the normal means. Churches do make profit from this.

Sorry, but it is a product just as a McDonalds cheese burger is.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X