After PC discounter MSY was stung a whopping $203,500 for misrepresenting consumer warranty rights, we expected that the tech industry would have reviewed their terms with a legal microscope.
Not so, it seems … as we discovered when we were about to make a purchase from leading Apple vendor Computers Now.
In 2011, ACMA pressured the telco industry to get its act together on how customers are treated. After extended drafting and consultation phases, Comms Alliance has submitted an aggressive new TCP Code to ACMA for registration. The question is now: Is the new draft code tough enough for ACMA?
As CSP Central has previously explained, ACMA and ACCC are not falling over themselves to approve the Alliance’s work.
Continue Reading →
Exetel’s CEO John Linton died yesterday, and CSP Central joins with the telco industry in acknowledging his contribution to the sector.
Opinionated, outspoken, uncompromising and unrelenting, Linton was never reticent in letting the rest of us know what he thought. But love or hate some of his opinions, he built a successful telco (with a fiercely loyal staff and customer base) in remarkably quick time, contributed to debate at many levels, and was a major benefactor of Australia’s wildlife and environment through Exetel’s generous donations to community-based programs to protect endangered species and regenerate natural environments.
Exetel’s slogan … ‘Helping make a better world’ … would be corny in the mouths of most other telcos. But Linton meant it and lived it.
Linton suffered a major stroke in the afternoon and passed away during the evening, surrounded by family.
Vale, JL.
The jungle drums are sending negative messages about the new TCP Code proposed by Communications Alliance. If the rumours are correct, ACMA is on the verge of refusing to register the draft Code, opting for more aggressive legislative regulation of the telco industry instead.
People are often confused about the effect of clauses that say ‘You acknowledge that we have made no other promises or representations to you.’Often you see such clauses quoted in support of an argument that a claim for misrepresentation cannot succeed where a contract contains this clause.
But that ain’t necessarily so. In fact, it ain’t even normally so.
After months of secret negotiations, Telstra, Optus & Voda have rolled over and ‘offered’ ACCC a court enforceable undertaking … equivalent to court injunctions … to stamp out false advertising in the broadband and telephony industry.When legal advisers warn second and third tier telcos and ISPs about advertising content, the single most common retort is ‘Telstra gets away with it’ and ‘We saw an Optus ad like that’ and ‘But Voda says the same thing’.
It’s a pretty good argument. If the giants can do it, why can’t we ?
No mistake, this is the biggest telco-truth-in-advertising hit ever landed by the national regulator. Like all good commando raids, it seemed to come from nowhere. Only yesterday morning did rumours start to circulate that ‘something big’ was coming out of Canberra in the next 24 hours.
If Tiers 2, 3 & 4 don’t get their act together now, they can’t complain they’re being picked on. And ACCC has made sure that Telstra, Optus & Voda are motivated to keep their networks honest.
The Senate Standing Committee on Economics has received, and noted, strong submissions that part of the proposed new unfair contracts law can’t be right.
But so what ? The Committee majority finds no fault with the reasoning of law Professor Frank Zumbo, or the Consumer Action Law Centre … but it has still rubber stamped the Bill, virtually guaranteeing its passage into law.
And yes, the problem wording is the part we described as the Bill’s ‘bonkers bit’ back in June 2009. It’s disappointing that the Senate Committee system hasn’t been able to deliver a sensible outcome.
OK, that’s a March 2006 headline, but it makes the point: failing to comply with the approaching 28 September deadline for carriers to lodge their annual Eligible Revenue Return is not a good idea.
Online tech magazine IT News could have inadvertently lured ISPs into legal disaster with a recent article on copyright issues. It’s vital for CSPs to understand the risk they may create if they publicly refer to legal advice they have received.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority has flexed its Telecommunications Act muscles against ISP Web Ace, directing it to comply with the billing rules under the Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code.Web Ace is the trading name of Jason Kenneth McKay of Perth, WA. ACMA says that McKay has been extracting payments from customer credit cards without authority, and failing to refund.
The issue was first publicised on Whirlpool, the Australian internet users’ town square. In May 2008, Whirlpool user ‘yabbitboy’ posted:
I am signed up to webace’s email only plan ( $60 a year ), I get unauthorized billings by webace 4 times already, 4*$60. I had contacted them by email – never got replied and also tried contacting them by phone – I do speak to them by person to person but they said they are ‘busy’ and say they will call me back which is *******.
ACMA has now used its power to direct McKay not to extract payments without issuing a bill and in accordance with customer authorisation.
Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.
© 2012 CSPCentral. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress. Designed by 
Loading ...
Recent Comments