Consumer Protection Act

[NecroWolf]

I heard about this today at University and did some poking around on Google to see what it's all about. It seems that it came into effect a few days ago.


Dummies? guide to the consumer act

RYAN CRESSWELL

Business Editor

It?s official, the ordinary consumer now has so much clout that business, possibly the heavyweight champion of South Africa, has to box clever in future.

The Department of Trade and Industry?s long-awaited Consumer Protection Act, passed by then- president Kgalema Motlanthe in 2009, was intended to become effective last October but this was deferred until midnight last night because neither the department nor businesses were ready.

This follows months of hype by government and consumer bodies, and warnings of trouble ahead by some business sectors and analysts.

The Consumer Protection Forum, an umbrella body for consumer organisations which has participated in the drafting of the act, has said its implementation will be ?instrumental? in achieving higher levels of consumer protection.

Western Cape MEC for Economic Development and Tourism Alan Winde said last week consumers now had statutory recognition of their right to confidentiality, access to information, disclosure, fairness, transparency, safety and redress.

Ashley Searle, the director of the Western Cape Office of the Consumer Protector, said the act went as far as to state that a supplier may not enter into an agreement with a consumer that is patently one-sided, unreasonable or unfair.

However, Dawie Roodt, chief economist for the Efficient Group, has warned that the act allows consumers to cancel deals for the slightest fault and this could eventually cause businesses to close and ?millions? of jobs to be lost. Some law experts also argue that the act could lead to complex court battles.

There are further complaints because some of the regulations pertaining to certain sectors have been made public too late for companies to get ready by today.

But, punch for punch, what does the act really mean for the new contender, you, the consumer? The Cape Argus and our sister newspaper The Star have sourced and simplified the following new rules for you.

Full article (http://www.iol.co.za/capeargus/dummies-guide-to-the-consumer-act-1.1050659)

Full Official government version (http://www.thedti.gov.za/ccrd/cpact09.pdf)

Short official government version
(http://www.ncf.org.za/docs/conference/dti_presentation.pdf)
Mail and Guardian FAQ
(http://mg.co.za/article/2011-04-04-seven-things-you-should-know-about-the-consumer-protection-act)
I think it's a good idea in principle(we'll have to see how it works out in practice). It keeps companies accountable for their actions. I especially like the direct marketing marketing exclusion list though.

[Toxxyc]

The act has been extended to the point where in the near future you won't be able to sell something "as is", and will be forced to give some kind of warranty with the product. I know the warranty they will require on cars will be something like 6 months, which I think is an excellent thing. This means that you will be protected from buying something that was simply "covered up" by the seller.

I just bought a car, and was told this by a dude dealing with private sales a lot. Thought it fits... :)

[JackB]

This is great news for all.
The businesses will obviously pull out the "Jobs will be lost guns" to try and kill this act, but if you think about it, consumers are ripped off by corporations all the time. They should do business straight up in any case so this Act is only ensuring they follow principled guide lines.

An example i experienced personally was friends of mine working at Incredible Connection,they used to accept warranty jobs, like for example a graphics card that was 2 months old and had a fault. They would replace it *which was there policy* and take the faulty one, repair it, then put it in a box and use it as a "new" on for the next warranty job that came in. This act will ensure that kind of rubbish doesn't happen.

And as for the second hand car story, about them having to report "ALL" defects on the car. I like this most, especially in a world where second hand car sales are on the rise. It will help people to get what they pay for or visa versa.

[KalMaverick]

The act has been extended to the point where in the near future you won't be able to sell something "as is", and will be forced to give some kind of warranty with the product. I know the warranty they will require on cars will be something like 6 months, which I think is an excellent thing. This means that you will be protected from buying something that was simply "covered up" by the seller.

I just bought a car, and was told this by a dude dealing with private sales a lot. Thought it fits... :)

Really? I don't think so.

You can still sell something as is, you just have to list everything that is wrong.

I never read about a 6 month warranty which is a bad idea in this case.

[Toxxyc]

Really? I don't think so.

You can still sell something as is, you just have to list everything that is wrong.

I never read about a 6 month warranty which is a bad idea in this case.

No no this act isn't being enforced just yet. It seems to be coming into action at Q3 this year or something.

The warranty is actually a very good idea I think. You will be forced to list everything that is wrong, and if something else fails due to neglect or misuse on the vehicle during the original owners' use, the buyer will be able to deduct the amount from the vehicle cost or claim a reimbursement. It will no doubt have gruelling implications, but I think it will be better in the long run for all users, specially the less financially stable ones. Buy a car and know it WILL work for 6 months is a good think IMHO. And if the seller has to list everything that is wrong, the value of the car can be much more accurately determined. Less people will be scewed.

[Scy7he]

Had my first taste of someone knowing the consumer act today. It wasnt pretty, but we reach an agreement atleast. It was both our faults to be honest, but yeah.

[Azraphael]

The warranty is actually a very good idea I think.

You don't sell a lot of second hand goods do you? I have yet to read through the whole act, but have seen some abbreviated versions of it, and honestly, I think guys that sell a lot of second hand goods are going to get schneid on this. I sell a lot of used PC's and you can never underestimate the human capacity for stupidity. I have had guys delete (somehow) OS installations and many other random acts of stupidity, only for them to call me and ask for a refund. Usually this is a few months down the line. Now as I understand it, they will actually have a right to demand money back, even though nine times out of ten, the fault was caused by their dumb-assedness. While this isn't necessarily a major problem, apply this logic to somebody who buys a used car from a private seller. Unless you as the seller know what you are doing under the hood of a car (which 99% of people don't), and are sticking your head in there every week to check for possible faults, what is to stop the buyer coming back 6 months down the line, and demanding a refund when something goes wrong. All they have to do is basically say that you hid the problem from them. I am trying to sell my car at the moment and am a little stressed that some chop is going to nit-pick over something 6 months from now, when I know that I won't have cash to sort them out.

Very seldomly do used goods come with a warranty, and that has always worked. You are buying second hand, at a cheaper price than new, and with that comes the fact that the item you are buying does not come with a warranty (in most cases, vehicles are different as warranties are transferred from owner to owner, provided they are still valid), and that it has obviously seen some wear and tear. Used car dealerships are not going to be affected as much by this as much as the private seller will. Most dealerships generally have a mechanic on site that can do basic repairs to the car so as not to cost the dealership much money when having to honour that agreement. Private sellers like myself on the other hand, are going to have to cough up big time. Also, remember dealerships will get clever with this and adjust their pricing accordingly.

Don't get me wrong though, I do not feel the whole Act is flawed, I am all for large companies and corporations being held to task over shoddy workmanship, but I think the used goods part needs to be re-worked. I will comment a bit more later once I have had time to have a decent look at the Act, but going on what little I know of it at the moment, I think it's gonna take some time to iron out all the kinks in it.

[KalMaverick]

I agree. There is something as too much protection. Voetstoots should remain voetstoots.

If I sell you something voetstoots and you agree after inspecting it and are happy and pay me then leave. Then stuff you I don't want to see you ever again.

That is how it should be. Yes I agree with all the new goods and grey imports and things that come with warranties and all that, but with the voetstoots thing I think it's a very bad idea.

I mean you sell something second hand, like a car. Later the engine blows because the guy was racing like a windgat. Didn't check the water or whatever the reason might be. Then you in the crap because of his stupidity.

[{G}Zulu]

You don't sell a lot of second hand goods do you? I have yet to read through the whole act, but have seen some abbreviated versions of it, and honestly, I think guys that sell a lot of second hand goods are going to get schneid on this. I sell a lot of used PC's and you can never underestimate the human capacity for stupidity. I have had guys delete (somehow) OS installations and many other random acts of stupidity, only for them to call me and ask for a refund. Usually this is a few months down the line. Now as I understand it, they will actually have a right to demand money back, even though nine times out of ten, the fault was caused by their dumb-assedness. While this isn't necessarily a major problem, apply this logic to somebody who buys a used car from a private seller. Unless you as the seller know what you are doing under the hood of a car (which 99% of people don't), and are sticking your head in there every week to check for possible faults, what is to stop the buyer coming back 6 months down the line, and demanding a refund when something goes wrong. All they have to do is basically say that you hid the problem from them. I am trying to sell my car at the moment and am a little stressed that some chop is going to nit-pick over something 6 months from now, when I know that I won't have cash to sort them out.

Very seldomly do used goods come with a warranty, and that has always worked. You are buying second hand, at a cheaper price than new, and with that comes the fact that the item you are buying does not come with a warranty (in most cases, vehicles are different as warranties are transferred from owner to owner, provided they are still valid), and that it has obviously seen some wear and tear. Used car dealerships are not going to be affected as much by this as much as the private seller will. Most dealerships generally have a mechanic on site that can do basic repairs to the car so as not to cost the dealership much money when having to honour that agreement. Private sellers like myself on the other hand, are going to have to cough up big time. Also, remember dealerships will get clever with this and adjust their pricing accordingly.

Don't get me wrong though, I do not feel the whole Act is flawed, I am all for large companies and corporations being held to task over shoddy workmanship, but I think the used goods part needs to be re-worked. I will comment a bit more later once I have had time to have a decent look at the Act, but going on what little I know of it at the moment, I think it's gonna take some time to iron out all the kinks in it.

If any ironing is going to be done at all. I agree with you about the used/second hand private dealers.

[Toxxyc]

It is exactly that voetstoots idea they want to drop. I mean, if I buy something second hand, I don't really give a damn about a warranty, as it is (to me, at least) obvious that the object was used, sometimes even extensively, and as a result of this I don't care about stuff that sits loose or rattles when I buy it. That's the way it is, and period. Still, many people sell online, I've seen XBox 360's going for R1,500 and the owner claiming "perfect condition" only for the buyer to get the thing and realizing "perfect" actually means "I dropped it off a cliff and drove over it with a tank". These buyers must be protected.

I think "voetstoots" can be used too easily: Seller greased up the bearings on his car with fresh grease yesterday. The dude who wants to buy the car comes and takes a look today and buys the car because "everything is so smooth". Tomorrow he takes a longer drive, the bearings heat up and the grease runs out like snot from a 4-year old. The cars runs bumpy and noisy the day after that and soon the noise and safety levels become really not cool, resulting in a very ****ed off buyer and a very safe, satisfied and protected seller.

I hear what you are saying about "voetstoots" remaining "voetstoots", but some people aren't intelligent enough to make an intelligent choice, and this results in scammed or screwed buyers and sellers with fat pockets, which really isn't a very humane thing to do.

EDIT: But I also understand the "too much protection" thing. It won't help you much if the buyer comepletely ****s up the product you sold in good condition and just claims his money back, like in the PC market (an especially sensitive market in this opinion).

[Azraphael]

I mean you sell something second hand, like a car. Later the engine blows because the guy was racing like a windgat. Didn't check the water or whatever the reason might be. Then you in the crap because of his stupidity.

And if the guy bought the car from you at 100k, where the **** are you supposed to find 100k, 6 months down the line to sort the guy out. Just as an example, a mate of mine has the Golf IV GTi R. A new gearbox for that car is R48000. If some muppet (and I'm not pointing fingers here, but realistically he will be from the flats or Bellville :p) buys the car, and the gearbox blows 3 months later because this twat has been racing up and down Voortrekker Road, what is to stop him from coming back and saying that the gearbox was damaged prior to him buying it? My buddies then got to cough up R48000 for a new gearbox? What this essentially means is that if you want to sell a car, best you get a AA road clearance certificate before you hand it over. Oh, but wait, the last time I checked that cost you R800. So, basically, the biggest winner under this new Act is the AA. Oh, I didn't mention that two cars that I have owned were passed through AA fraudulently, the previous owners had bribed the mechanics to write glowing reports, only for major issues (read blown engine) to occur within 2 weeks of buying these cars.

[Toxxyc]

^ Roadworthy and AA checks cost R1,000 easily nowadays, and then that's only the minimum AA test I'm talking about (the 40-point check). My car had to go through it before the bank would give me financing (three months ago), and luckily EVERYTHING on my car is just epic... :)

Bank also gave me a 2-year warranty on the car, Class A - their best, at something like R75 per month, which is really epic. Covers R10,000 on the engine, R6,000 on the gearbox, R1,500 on the sound system and so on for a list of stuff of about 35 things. This really isn't bad for a 1.6 engined car, if the engine kaks I can get a NEW one!

[KalMaverick]

I've seen XBox 360's going for R1,500 and the owner claiming "perfect condition" only for the buyer to get the thing and realizing "perfect" actually means "I dropped it off a cliff and drove over it with a tank". These buyers must be protected.

I agree to an extent. Yes I know people do take fat chances and I know my perfect condition means something totally different to others perfect condition.

I always view buying something secondhand as a risk, that's why I will probably never buy something second hand online, I can't see the thing or test it. In person yes I can test it and make a decision if I want to buy it.

But honestly... 6 months down the line?


I think "voetstoots" can be used too easily: Seller greased up the bearings on his car with fresh grease yesterday. The dude who wants to buy the car comes and takes a look today and buys the car because "everything is so smooth". Tomorrow he takes a longer drive, the bearings heat up and the grease runs out like snot from a 4-year old. The cars runs bumpy and noisy the day after that and soon the noise and safety levels become really not cool, resulting in a very ****ed off buyer and a very safe, satisfied and protected seller.

That's what voetstoots is. If you want to buy something and you accept it as is, it is your responsibility to make sure this is what you want. Whether you must take it through a test before you confirm buying it or a test drive or whatever.

You must remember you are not forced to buy it, you can go anywhere else and look for something, you can even go buy it new or a place where you get a warranty and whatnot.

If you choose to buy it voetstoots then that's it too bad. When it comes to online purchases then it gets complicated and I admit people need protection but this thing seems way way way way way to open for abuse.

[Toxxyc]

Good point...

*thinking about my opinion with doubt*