Consumer Protection Act.

Unfortunately for you, Kage has it right on the money... we had to invest in a much longer T&C, ours is 3 pages long now, and all the products that have graphics screens now display an EULA which if the client agrees to, generates a digital certificate stored in non-volatile memory.
 
Ianf1 said:
Someone told me that this will do for consumers what the labour laws did for employees.
Now that is scary, I feel the labour laws stifle employment by small businesses. I would rather mechanise than employ more people. Will this scare off new businesses as an unintended consequence?
Click to expand...

I sincerely doubt it.
It is not changing the concept of business, just how business will be done.
Expectations will be changed but not the process.
 
phiber said:
thanks, really hope this makes our lives easier, its great that its there, but companies better behave. Don't want to have to see 10 court cases before all the companies learn their lesson!
Click to expand...

How many court cases until the consumer learns their lesson?
 
And what lesson must consumers learn?
Click to expand...

- Read the farking Manual before Use!!!! Adhere to warning lables and don't do it if the manual says don't do it.
- Stop trying to get away with the cheapest chinese junk to do a particular task and spend a little more money on a quality product
- Stop trying to cut corners when doing a DIY job because "you think you know better"
 
Kage said:
No.
This is where retailers or suppliers of a 3rd party product (i.e. you have not created it) have clear communication and understanding regarding the CPA and what they are liable for.
Remember you are just the agent for their product and/or service and can not be held liable for any defaults or misrepresentation of said product and/or service.
Click to expand...

wrong
I don't think you understand the act properly.
 
Kage said:
Please explain how I am wrong and how I have misunderstood the act.
Click to expand...

5. (1) This Act applies to—
(a) every transaction occurring within the Republic unless it is exempted by subsection (2), or in terms of subsections (3) and (4);
(b) the promotion of any goods or services, or of the supplier of any goods or services, within the Republic, unless—
(i) those goods or services are the subject of a transaction to which this
43
Act applies in terms of paragraph (a); or
(ii) the promotion of those goods or services has been exempted in terms of subsections (3) and (4);
(c) goods or services that are supplied or performed in terms of a transaction to which this Act applies, irrespective whether any of those goods or services are offered or supplied in conjunction with any other goods or services, or separate from any other goods or services; and
(d) goods that are supplied in terms of a transaction that is exempt from the application of this Act, but only to the extent provided for in subsection (5).
(2) This Act does not apply to any transaction—
(a) in terms of which goods or services are promoted to the State, or are supplied to or at the direction of the State; or
(b) if—
(i) the value of the transaction exceeds the threshold value determined by the Minister in terms of section 6; and
(ii) the goods or services are supplied to a person in the supply chain who, in the ordinary course of business—
(aa) markets those goods for resale, irrespective whether to other persons in the supply chain or directly to consumers; or
(bb) applies or utilises those goods or services in the production of other goods or services, or in the marketing of any goods or
44
services, irrespective whether to other persons in the supply chain or directly to consumers; or
(c) if the transaction falls within an exemption granted by the Minister in terms of subsections (3) and (4).
(3) A regulatory authority may apply to the Minister for an industry-wide exemption from one or more provisions of this Act on the grounds that those provisions overlap or duplicate a regulatory scheme administered by that regulatory authority in terms of—
(a) any other national legislation ; or
(b) any treaty, international law, convention or protocol.
(4) The Minister, by notice in the Gazette after receiving the advice of the Commission, may grant an exemption contemplated in subsection (3)—
(a) only to the extent that the relevant regulatory scheme ensures the achievement of the purposes of this Act at least as well as the provisions of this Act; and
(b) subject to any limits or conditions necessary to ensure the achievement of the purposes of this Act.
(5) If any goods are supplied within the Republic to any person in terms of a transaction that is exempt from the application of this Act, those goods, and the importer or producer, distributor and retailer, respectively, of those goods are nevertheless subject to sections 60 and 61.
45
(6) For greater certainty, the following arrangements must be regarded as a transaction between a supplier and consumer, within the meaning of this Act:
(a) The supply of any goods or services in the ordinary course of business to any of its members by a club, trade union, association, society, or other collectivity, whether corporate or unincorporated, of persons voluntarily associated and organised for a common purpose or purposes, whether for fair value consideration or otherwise, irrespective whether there is a charge or economic contribution demanded or expected in order to become or remain a member of that entity;
(b) a solicitation of offers to enter into a franchise agreement;
(c) an offer by a potential franchisor to enter into a franchise agreement with a potential franchisee;
(d) a franchise agreement or an agreement supplementary to a franchise agreement; and
(e) the supply of any goods or services to a franchisee in terms of a franchise agreement.
(7) Despite subsection (2)(b), this Act applies to a transaction contemplated in subsection (6)(b) to (e) irrespective whether the value of that transaction falls above or below the threshold determined in terms of section 6.
(8) The application of this Act in terms of subsections (1) to (7) extends to a matter irrespective whether the supplier—
46
(a) resides or has its principal office within or outside the Republic;
(b) operates on a for-profit basis or otherwise; or
(c) is an individual, juristic person, partnership, trust, organ of state, an entity owned or directed by an organ of state, a person contracted or licensed by an organ of state to offer or supply any goods or services, or is a public-private partnership; or
(d) is required or licensed in terms of any public regulation to make the supply of the particular goods or services available to all or part of the public.
Click to expand...

in short
The Consumer Protection Act applies to the following:
• Every transaction occurring within the Republic of South Africa;
• Promotion or supply of any goods and services occurring within the Republic; and
• Goods or services that are supplied or performed, in the Republic, in terms of transactions
mentioned in the Act.
The Act is not applicable in respect of:
• Goods or services promoted or supplied to the state;
• Industry-wide exemption being granted to regulatory authorities;
• Credit agreements, in terms of the National Credit Act, but not goods or services;
• Services under employment contracts;
• Agreements giving effect to collective bargaining agreements; and
• Agreements giving effect to bargaining agreements (Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act).
Click to expand...

so as a retailer or an agent, you are fully responsible for the goods you supply. :)
 
DreamKing said:
in short


so as a retailer or an agent, you are fully responsible for the goods you supply. :)
Click to expand...

You forget...that a retailer is a consumer of the original supplier.
In my company we have already been in discussions with the suppliers to ensure that all aspects of this act is considered.
Liability for product, price and service is a double edged sword.
 
Kage said:
You forget...that a retailer is a consumer of the original supplier.
In my company we have already been in discussions with the suppliers to ensure that all aspects of this act is considered.
Liability for product, price and service is a double edged sword.
Click to expand...

you forgot, you first have to solve / refund / exchange the faulty good to your customer first then you fight with your supplier. I reckon your selling price is more than your buying price, right? So, who lose? You!!!!! Why you can say you are not liable for what you sold? Secondly, if you enforce your "right" to your supplier, guess what is the consequence? If you know "business", you know how tough it will.
 
DreamKing said:
you forgot, you first have to solve / refund / exchange the faulty good to your customer first then you fight with your supplier. I reckon your selling price is more than your buying price, right? So, who lose? You!!!!! Why you can say you are not liable for what you sold? Secondly, if you enforce your "right" to your supplier, guess what is the consequence? If you know "business", you know how tough it will.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I am completely aware that the resolution of the complaint/query will be resolved at store level first and then escalated if need be.
We have clear T&C's through contracts with our suppliers regarding products and services that we, as a 3rd party deliver to clients.

This is what I am saying Dreamking.
The CPA stretches beyond a retailer/service provider it goes as far back as the original supplier. You can not selectively choose how to apply the CPA.
There is no choice. Suppliers that deliver faulty/poor/overpriced products and services will be held as accountable as retailers that supply faulty/poor/overpriced products and services.

You can not as business owner not hold your supplier/s accountable.
That is folly! It will only result in your business failing if you have to resort to refunds to account for he faulty/poor/overpriced products or services that is being supplied to you.
 
Kage said:
Not at all. I am completely aware that the resolution of the complaint/query will be resolved at store level first and then escalated if need be.
We have clear T&C's through contracts with our suppliers regarding products and services that we, as a 3rd party deliver to clients.

This is what I am saying Dreamking.
The CPA stretches beyond a retailer/service provider it goes as far back as the original supplier. You can not selectively choose how to apply the CPA.
There is no choice. Suppliers that deliver faulty/poor/overpriced products and services will be held as accountable as retailers that supply faulty/poor/overpriced products and services.

You can not as business owner not hold your supplier/s accountable.
That is folly! It will only result in your business failing if you have to resort to refunds to account for he faulty/poor/overpriced products or services that is being supplied to you.
Click to expand...

You can hold your suppliers liable, but not in terms of the CPA. In other words, as you are a business with a turnover of R 3 000 000 pa (according to the draft regulations), you are not protected in terms of the CPA, and your suppliers are legally allowed to 'deny all liability for their products' in terms of their T&Cs.

This is one of those things that will need to be resolved in practice. One option is to get your customers to make their claims directly with your suppliers, as they are allowed to do in terms of the act. Another is to make sure your suppliers T&Cs are acceptable to you, but as a small business, you don't have much negotiating power.

It's going to be tough for small businesses, but they make up the bulk of the retailers in certain industries, so between them, their customers and their suppliers, a 'best practice' agreement will have to be reached. Small retailer's one bargaining chip is S 60 (IIRC), because they can deny liability for certain damages (the costliest sort), and pass all those claims onto their supplier.

I was wondering today about who's going to be hurt most:
I think Vodacom and the other cellular operators know how they're going to adapt and cope, but they're just getting in two last weeks of consumer raping before they have to change.
I somehow doubt that Monochoice is adequately prepared for the ****-storm coming their way.
Small retailers will just convince their customers to claim directly from the importer.
Importers and wholesalers are going to suffer. The lights importers particularly (Radiant, Eurolux, etc.), because they sell the cheapest, nastiest products they can find.
Retailers that don't like to display prices because "they don't compete on price" are going to cry for S 23.
Business that plainly rip off their customers through unfair, complicated and one sided T&Cs are going to suffer (Planet Fitness).

All in all, some fun and games are coming.
 
Kage said:
Not at all. I am completely aware that the resolution of the complaint/query will be resolved at store level first and then escalated if need be.
We have clear T&C's through contracts with our suppliers regarding products and services that we, as a 3rd party deliver to clients.

This is what I am saying Dreamking.
The CPA stretches beyond a retailer/service provider it goes as far back as the original supplier. You can not selectively choose how to apply the CPA.
There is no choice. Suppliers that deliver faulty/poor/overpriced products and services will be held as accountable as retailers that supply faulty/poor/overpriced products and services.

You can not as business owner not hold your supplier/s accountable.
That is folly! It will only result in your business failing if you have to resort to refunds to account for he faulty/poor/overpriced products or services that is being supplied to you.
Click to expand...

Just curious, how will the CPA affect (over)pricing of products? Is there a limit on markup or something?
 
supersunbird said:
Just curious, how will the CPA affect (over)pricing of products? Is there a limit on markup or something?
Click to expand...

This is something that we are still discussing.
We dont feel it is the consumer's right to know our markup and it has not been stipulated in the act.
Consumers are not able to walk in into a retailer and demand their markup.
However what the consumer has to be made aware of are things like cancellation and change polocies.
They have be advised exactly what they are looking at losing if they were to cancel or make any changes.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
You can hold your suppliers liable, but not in terms of the CPA. In other words, as you are a business with a turnover of R 3 000 000 pa (according to the draft regulations), you are not protected in terms of the CPA, and your suppliers are legally allowed to 'deny all liability for their products' in terms of their T&Cs.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that clarification.

This is one of those things that will need to be resolved in practice. One option is to get your customers to make their claims directly with your suppliers, as they are allowed to do in terms of the act. Another is to make sure your suppliers T&Cs are acceptable to you, but as a small business, you don't have much negotiating power.
Click to expand...

This is what we are doing at this stage.
We are discussions with all our service providers and suppliers.

It's going to be tough for small businesses, but they make up the bulk of the retailers in certain industries, so between them, their customers and their suppliers, a 'best practice' agreement will have to be reached. Small retailer's one bargaining chip is S 60 (IIRC), because they can deny liability for certain damages (the costliest sort), and pass all those claims onto their supplier.

I was wondering today about who's going to be hurt most:
I think Vodacom and the other cellular operators know how they're going to adapt and cope, but they're just getting in two last weeks of consumer raping before they have to change.
I somehow doubt that Monochoice is adequately prepared for the ****-storm coming their way.
Small retailers will just convince their customers to claim directly from the importer.
Importers and wholesalers are going to suffer. The lights importers particularly (Radiant, Eurolux, etc.), because they sell the cheapest, nastiest products they can find.
Retailers that don't like to display prices because "they don't compete on price" are going to cry for S 23.
Business that plainly rip off their customers through unfair, complicated and one sided T&Cs are going to suffer (Planet Fitness).

All in all, some fun and games are coming.
Click to expand...

I must confess that I am really looking forward to the afect this will have on the telecomm companies and especially MChoice.
 
I just came back from a training seminar and these are some of the salient points.

Implied Warrenty
All goods purchased will carry a 6 month warrenty. This warrenty covers Repair,Refund or Replace. The key here is that the consumer has the choice of which option they prefer. So they can choose if they want a Repair,Refund or replacement. if the replacement option is taken a new 6 month warranty starts over.

Direct Marketing
You will have a 5 day cooling off period to decline the offer after agreeing to it. Should you inform your supplier that you no longer want the offer they presented to you, They will have to give you back your cash within 15 business days.
You may not contact consumers outside the following hours: 8am - 7pm.
If you install a sign on your post box that states " no junkmail" you can take legal recourse if you get junkmail from the supplier of the advert.
A national database will be setup for the people to register so that they may not receive SPAM / promotional information / direct marketing. everyone will be forced to check with this database once a month and clean / update accordingly. this applies to DMA members and those who are not DMA members. We are still unsure if DMA will run this national database as they have the infrastructure.

Gift cards / Air time

All gift cards directly purchased must carry a minimum 3 year expiry. this applies to air time etc.
I enquired who this works with loyalty programme vouchers but it's still a grey area.

Bait Marketing
If you advertise a product You must have sufficent stock levels to meet the expected demand. you cannnot advertise a TV and only have 1 -2 in stock.
suppliers will be exempt from this if they can prove that it was due to unforeseen circumstances. ( ship delay etc)

The act is not retrospective.
Compulsory Referral campaigns are illegal
No more negative marketing. eg, You can't send a consumer and tell them you need to opt out or we will start charging you.
You can't discriminate. right of admission etc falls away

Fixed term contracts
you can give 20 days written notice to cancel your contract and you will only be liable for 10% x no of remaining months on contract. eg: sign gym memebership for 1 year @ R100 p/m. after 1st month you decide to cancel. you become liable for 10% of R100 ( R10)x 11 months = R110. This is the penalty fee.
This doesn't apply to cellphones. Cell phones will more than likely make you pay for 2 contracts ( device and service). what would happen is you cancel the service. pay the 10% penalty fee and still have to fully pay for the cell.
 
wallsend said:
I just came back from a training seminar and these are some of the salient points.

Implied Warrenty
All goods purchased will carry a 6 month warrenty. This warrenty covers Repair,Refund or Replace. The key here is that the consumer has the choice of which option they prefer. So they can choose if they want a Repair,Refund or replacement. if the replacement option is taken a new 6 month warranty starts over.

...
Click to expand...

I don't think so.
 
What if a client comes back and says he wasn't told the product couldn't do something, and the sales consultant says he was told or didn't ask? Who will decide who was in the wrong here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X