Flexing my consumer muscles
I posted on Tuesday about how Subway had stuffed up my lunch and failed miserably in the customer service department.
The same afternoon, I sent an email to the ACCC (Australian Consumer and Competition Commision), asking for information on a certain clause in the Trade Practices Act, because of advertising by Target in a catalogue, of bed linen they didn't have in stock.
Here's part of what I said:
Over Easter, the Target catalogue had a front page advert for bed linen at 50% off. On the morning of the first advertised day, we visited one store and were told that all stock had already been sold and that no more was being brought in. To his credit, the assistant store manager told us we could have any other bedding at the same discounted price (50% off), but we didn't want anything else. Two days later, we visited another Target store and they too had already run out of the advertised stock. In addition, they had advertised $10 bras in the same catalogue. Again, there were none of these left, despite the catalogue only having just come out. At that same store, I purchased a CD that scanned above the ticketed price, so all around, we were/are fairly unimpressed.
And I went on to ask for details of the clause I wanted referenced, so I could contact Target with my complaint. Sure, we won't die because we didn't get the bed linen we wanted, but it's the principle of the whole thing.
I didn't expect the response I got from the ACCC. Here's part of it...
...The main purpose of the TPA (Trade Practices Act) is to promote competition and efficiency in markets within Australia, and to protect consumers and businesses from unlawful anti-competitive and unfair market practices. The ACCC's role includes fostering fair and informed markets by seeking compliance with the TPA....
...Bait advertising occurs when goods or services are advertised at an attractive price, but when the consumer goes to buy the goods or services they are not available and the advertiser seeks to switch the consumer to a higher priced product or service....
...Whether Target is in breach of the bait advertising provision of the TPA is ultimately up to a court to decide. While the conduct about which you complain may raise concerns under the above provision of the TPA, Target may chose to rely on the defence as outlined. However, as there are possible concerns with the conduct described in your email, I have entered the details of your complaint into the ACCC's s national complaints database....
...At this stage the ACCC is not in a position to confirm what, if any, action may be taken on this matter. However, in the meantime this information will be used in the context of our ongoing monitoring.....
So, you Target bosses out there, be on your best behaviour, coz Big Brother is watching.
...Subway have yet to respond.
The same afternoon, I sent an email to the ACCC (Australian Consumer and Competition Commision), asking for information on a certain clause in the Trade Practices Act, because of advertising by Target in a catalogue, of bed linen they didn't have in stock.
Here's part of what I said:
Over Easter, the Target catalogue had a front page advert for bed linen at 50% off. On the morning of the first advertised day, we visited one store and were told that all stock had already been sold and that no more was being brought in. To his credit, the assistant store manager told us we could have any other bedding at the same discounted price (50% off), but we didn't want anything else. Two days later, we visited another Target store and they too had already run out of the advertised stock. In addition, they had advertised $10 bras in the same catalogue. Again, there were none of these left, despite the catalogue only having just come out. At that same store, I purchased a CD that scanned above the ticketed price, so all around, we were/are fairly unimpressed.
And I went on to ask for details of the clause I wanted referenced, so I could contact Target with my complaint. Sure, we won't die because we didn't get the bed linen we wanted, but it's the principle of the whole thing.
I didn't expect the response I got from the ACCC. Here's part of it...
...The main purpose of the TPA (Trade Practices Act) is to promote competition and efficiency in markets within Australia, and to protect consumers and businesses from unlawful anti-competitive and unfair market practices. The ACCC's role includes fostering fair and informed markets by seeking compliance with the TPA....
...Bait advertising occurs when goods or services are advertised at an attractive price, but when the consumer goes to buy the goods or services they are not available and the advertiser seeks to switch the consumer to a higher priced product or service....
...Whether Target is in breach of the bait advertising provision of the TPA is ultimately up to a court to decide. While the conduct about which you complain may raise concerns under the above provision of the TPA, Target may chose to rely on the defence as outlined. However, as there are possible concerns with the conduct described in your email, I have entered the details of your complaint into the ACCC's s national complaints database....
...At this stage the ACCC is not in a position to confirm what, if any, action may be taken on this matter. However, in the meantime this information will be used in the context of our ongoing monitoring.....
So, you Target bosses out there, be on your best behaviour, coz Big Brother is watching.
...Subway have yet to respond.
posted by E in Oz at 1:55 pm
these thoughts escaped my brain at 1:55 pm
1 Comments:
It's fairly common for stores to advertise things as 40% off or something, but you'll find that they increased the price the night before or something, so the "40% off" is actually really only 5% off normal price. That's how they get round it...
Post a Comment
<< Home