173 results, showing 121 to 140
First variation
On 26 May 2009 the ACCC accepted a variation to the s87B undertaking given by Kirin Holdings (Australia) Pty Ltd and National Foods to the ACCC on 24 July 2008.
Skins Compression Garments Pty Ltd (''Skins'') is the manufacturer of compression sports performance garments (“Skins products''), the supplier of Skins products to a distributor and retailers throughout Australia and a retailer of Skins products to the general public in Australia.
Skins Compression Garments Pty Ltd (''Skins'') is the manufacturer of compression sports performance garments (“Skins products''), the supplier of Skins products to a distributor and retailers throughout Australia and a retailer of Skins products to the general public in Australia.
Skins Compression Garments Pty Ltd (''Skins'') is the manufacturer of compression sports performance garments (“Skins products''), the supplier of Skins products to a distributor and retailers throughout Australia and a retailer of Skins products to the general public in Australia.
The LaManna Group companies (LaManna Bananas Pty Ltd, Verona Fruit Pty Ltd and LaManna Bananas (Adelaide) Pty Ltd), acting as horticulture produce agents, occasionally sold growers’ produce between their companies, as part of their distribution of produce across national markets.
The ACCC raised concerns that these transactions were not at arm's length and that the companies may not have, in every case, properly obtained growers' consent, as required under the Horticulture Code of Conduct.
LaManna Bananas Pty Ltd, on behalf of the LaManna Group companies, has undertaken that it will:
advise potentially affected growers of the ACCC's concerns
establish a special process to deal with any growers who raise concerns about sales of their produce
report to the ACCC on any grower's complaint that it could not resolve under that process, and
implement a trade practices compliance program to help it avoid future code breaches.
Sanjay Goel trading as Pacific ImpExp Services, an importer and retailer of furniture, electronics and toys, has acknowledged that he has contravened s65C of the Trade Practices Act by supplying two models of bunk beds, 'Model AB107' and ' Model LB70C', which did not meet the requirements of the mandatory standard for bunk beds.
The 'Model AB107' bunk bed did not have a barrier around all sides of the bed which may cause a roll-out hazard.
The 'Model AB107' and 'LB70C' bunk beds had openings in the guardrail which may cause a fall-through hazard, gaps in the guardrail which could cause an entrapment hazard, and did not display the required maximum mattress height warning and supplier identification labels.
Sanjay Goel has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC that for a period of three years he will not supply bunk beds that do not fully comply with the mandatory standard for bunk beds and will establish and implement a trade practices compliance program.
National telecommunications service provider Dodo Australia Pty Ltd has given a court enforceable undertaking in resolution of ACCC concerns.
Between December 2007 and March 2009 Dodo published on its website, in connection with the outright sale of handsets and other hardware product, the statement: “No refunds will be given on purchases”.
Between October 2008 and March 2009 Dodo also caused to be published on its website, and broadcast on television at various times between October and December 2008, advertisements for its ‘$29.90 Mobility Cap Plan’, ‘Free Fuel’ and ‘Cash Offer’ 24 month mobile cap plans (the "Free Offer Plans") that included representations to the effect consumers would receive specified goods or cash for free or at no cost when they signed up to the relevant 24 month Free Offer Plan. An investigation by the ACCC revealed Dodo offered comparable mobile cap plans (in included value and services) at a cheaper monthly fee without the free goods and cash.
The ACCC was concerned that by engaging in the above conduct Dodo likely contravened the misleading or deceptive conduct, false or misleading representation and offering of gifts or other free items provisions of the TPA.
The undertakings given by Dodo include it:
writing to the consumers affected by the conduct;
paying refunds to consumers;
reducing the monthly fee for each of the free offer plans; and
implementing and maintaining a revised trade practices compliance program.
Jarvis Walker Pty Ltd is a wholesaler of fishing rods and tackle, marine accessories and camping equipment to boating, fishing, sports and camping retailers and distributors in Australia and internationally. Its products are marketed under a number of brands, including Jarvis Marine.
In a section 87B undertaking accepted by the ACCC, Jarvis Walker acknowledges that it contravened section 65C(1)(a) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 by supplying elastic luggage straps without a warning label as required by regulation 11C of the Trade Practices (Consumer Product Safety Standards) Regulations 1979.
The non-compliant products were supplied between 25 October 2005 and 12 December 2008 to numerous traders across Australia for retail sale to consumers or for further distribution.
Jarvis Walker voluntarily published product safety recall notices in three publications between 27 December 2008 and February 2009, and used its best endeavours to ensure that retailers of the product displayed a copy of the product safety recall notice in stores for two months. Jarvis Walker has since decided to permanently remove the product from its product line.
Under the court enforceable undertaking Jarvis Walker has agreed to ensure that each product it supplies complies with any relevant consumer product safety standard, and to implement a Trade Practices Compliance Program.
On 30 April 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Mr Richard Lim Cherng Yih, a director of Toll Holdings Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Mr Yih agrees to sell down any interest he has in Asciano Limited and thereafter maintain his independence from Asciano.
Narnia Investments Pty Ltd (Narnia) and its sole director, Mr Simon Clarke (Mr Clarke), have provided a s87B Undertaking to the ACCC in conjunction with the settlement of civil court proceedings taken against them by the ACCC.
Narnia and Mr Clarke were found by the Federal Court to have engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct pursuant to section 52 of the Trade Practices Act.
Injunctions were imposed by the Federal Court against Narnia and Mr Clarke.
Mr Clarke was also ordered to undertake trade practices law compliance training.
The conduct concerned Narnia (which formerly controlled Advanced Hair Studio in Hobart) and Mr Clarke making false and misleading representations regarding a vulnerable consumer's right under his contract with Advanced Hair Studio Hobart to terminate the contract and obtain a refund of his deposit monies.
Under the terms of the consumer's $15,500 hair replacement contract with Advanced Hair Studio Hobart, the consumer was entitled to terminate his contract and to receive a refund of his deposit monies in circumstances where no hair treatment had actually commenced.
The s87B Undertaking provided by Narnia and Mr Clarke requires them to pay the affected consumer the $5,000 balance of $10,000 damages previously agreed between the ACCC and Mr Clarke ($5,000 has already been paid) and to refund the consumer his $1,800 deposit.
The Undertaking also requires Narnia and Mr Clarke to pay the ACCC's legal costs in the sum of $12,785
Colin Thompson (ABN 27 120 308 204) is a supplier and retailer of a wide range of tobacco products which it retails directly to consumers through his store within the Darwin CBD.
As part of his product range, Mr Thompson sold retail tobacco products.
These products are subject to a prescribed consumer product information standards outlined in the Trade Practices (Consumer Product Information Standards)(Tobacco) Regulations 2004.
The retail tobacco products supplied by Mr Thompson had an adhesive label affixed to the package which obscured the prescribed consumer product information being that of the Quitline logo and number along with the mandatory graphic and health warning.
The ACCC was concerned that the obscuring of these health warnings was not in the public interest as the purpose of this information is to promote quit smoking campaigns and to increase customer knowledge of the health effects of smoking.
Following this advice Mr Thompson removed the sticker obscuring the health message from the effected retail tobacco products.
On 22 April 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Manoj Kumar Patnaik, a director of Toll Holdings Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Manoj Kumar Patnaik agrees to sell down any interest he has in Asciano Limited and thereafter maintain his independence from Asciano.
In addition, Manoj Kumar Patnaik must immediately resign from all positions within Toll, and take no further part in the company if he ceases to meet the requisite standards of independence.
The undertaking is associated with the fifth variation, accepted by the ACCC on 18 April 2007, to the undertaking given by Toll to the ACCC on 11 March 2006.
Kogan Technologies Pty Ltd (Kogan) is an online retailer of Kogan branded home entertainment products through its website, www.kogan.com.au.
In November 2008, Kogan, through its website and an advertisement in the Herald Sun (Melbourne) made representations to the effect that various Kogan products were 'Now only $X (Save Y%)' and consumers could 'Save over $X' on several Kogan products.
The ACCC raised concerns that these savings were not genuine as Kogan had never previously advertised or sold these products at the higher non-sale price.
During June 2007 to February 2009 M2 Telecommunications represented on its Simply Mobiles website to the effect that:
M2 Telecommunications was not required to provide refunds and mobile phone manufacturers were responsible for all warranty claims on mobile phones sold through the Simply Mobiles website. The ACCC was concerned that the warranty representations may have misled consumers because express warranties offered by mobile phone manufacturers are in addition to, and not in the place of, the statutory rights available to consumers under the Act. These statutory rights entitle consumers to a refund from a retailer in certain circumstances and cannot be excluded;
preconfigured software will not have an impact on a customer’s ability to use the mobile phone on any other compatible Australian mobile network. The ACCC was concerned that the preconfigured software representations may have misled consumers because the existence of preconfigured software does or could have such an impact in certain circumstances; and
certain mobile phones sold through the Simply Mobiles website were compatible with all Australian 3G networks. The ACCC was concerned that the network representations may have misled consumers because those mobile phones were not compatible with Telstra's NextG network.
M2 Telecommunications has acknowledged the ACCC’s concerns that consumers may have been misled and deceived by the representations in contravention of sections 52, 53(c) and 53(g) of the Act.
M2 Telecommunications has offered the ACCC a section 87B undertaking that it will:
not make similar representations in the future;
offer affected consumers redress in the form of replacement mobile phones or refunds;
publish a corrective notice on its website;
publish an information article in a telecommunications industry journal; and
review and maintain its Trade Practices Compliance Program.