Archive | How not to do it RSS feed for this section

Saving legal costs: DIY ‘discovery’

By on 3 August 2009 in General, How not to do it

Law BooksIt’s a sad fact of life that ISPs and telcos sometimes end up in court cases.  The saddest fact of all is the legal bill that’s usually involved.

From a lawyer’s perspective, there’s a lot that clients can do to save time and money.  We’ll look at some key strategies in this series of posts.

Today, let’s look at the legal process of ‘discovery’, and why it needn’t add a small fortune to the bill.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 2 }

ACCC advice doesn’t add up

By on 9 June 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, New laws, Trade Practices Act

accc-goofJust to show that CSPs aren’t the only ones we are watching …

ACCC’s new guide to the component pricing law shows how easy it is to slip up in advertising. 

Click on the sample advert to enlarge it, and you’ll find that – despite ACCC encouragement – the advertiser shouldn’t advertise a total price of $2,240.  We’re all human, even the regulator.

Share
Comments { 0 }

TPG still can’t get liability law right

By on 6 June 2009 in How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

unwise-tpgAre some companies allergic to best practice legal compliance ?  TPG has finally changed a seriously illegal misrepresentation about handset warranties in its Mobile Fair Go policy, after we highlighted the problem in December 2008 and again in May 2009.

That’s good, but not good enough.  The really red hot misrepresentation has been removed from the document but it’s still likely to mislead consumers.  It’s a good example of misleading by what you don’t say.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Oh, no ! Dodo !

By on 4 June 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

dodo-4-6-09-smallWe admit that we’re fascinated by Dodo.  Do they even know there’s a Trade Practices Act, despite being dealt with by ACCC for serious breaches ?

Take a look at the Naked DSL advert in the top left hand corner of Dodo’s home page as at 4 June 2009.  In a few square inches, there are three TPA breaches. 

We’ll explain what they are.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 2 }

ACCC needs a communications guru

By on 1 June 2009 in How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

no-messageFunny how we all have blind spots.  When it assesses industry advertising, ACCC is keenly aware that a simple, clear message impacts on ordinary people, and that complicated T&Cs and small print aren’t taken on board.

But when it communicates with those same ordinary people, ACCC can forget all about the power of the main message and descend into baffling lawyer-speak.

ACCC should engage a marketing expert to offer input into its recall notices and consumer notifications.  If it wants to communicate important messages, it should use the skills of a communicator.

We’ll look at a couple of examples and analyse what goes wrong.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Dick Smith trade practices blunder

By on 27 May 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

dick-smith-1How ironic.  After we finished a trade practices compliance seminar in Canberra on Monday, we dropped into Dick Smith’s in Civic to browse.  And there was a prime example of one of the key points we’d been talking about.

The computer department featured signs urging purchasers to invest in extended warranties, to spare themselves the heavy repair bills that apply if their equipment fails out of standard warranty.   

As ACCC has told traders and customers time and again, a retailer can’t impose an arbitrary time limit on its own obligation to repair goods that fail.  In fact, ACCC generally views extended warranties as a rip off.

It’s a great example of the need for business-wide, ongoing trade practices training.  These signs looked like they were printed at that store, rather than head office.  Our guess is that a local manager had the bright idea … not realising that they were sailing so close to the legal wind, and that ACCC has only recently dealt with electrical importer GAF for misrepresenting warranty rights.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 1 }

TPG plays with fire … again

By on 16 May 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

tpg-undertaking-1

Way back in December 2008, we highlighted a seriously misleading statement in TPG’s Mobile Fair Go policy.

Five months later, it’s still there, and still breaching section 53(g) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

The difference is that, since last December, TPG has given a court-enforceable undertaking not to engage in misleading or deceptive conduct.  It’s playing double-or-nothing by maintaining this untrue statement on its web site.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 1 }

Dodo in hot water again !

By on 8 May 2009 in General, How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

dodo_deadACCC has made Dodo Australia give a Court enforceable undertaking to issue refunds customers and discount monthly plans, as a result of misleading statements.

According to ACCC, Dodo advertised misleading ‘free’ offer plans between October 2008 and March 2009 on both the television and its website.
Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Memo to TPG: Read ACCC’s lips

By on 1 April 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, Trade Practices Act

tpg-1aThis week, ACCC punched up phone card dealer Tel.Pacific for pricing conditions that were so unclear they were found to be misleading.  Looking at TPG’s web site, their marketers need to pay more attention.

ACCC Chairman Graeme Samuel can’t be much clearer than this:

‘It is highly unsatisfactory, if not illegal, for companies to make strong headline claims about their product and then seek to improperly qualify those claims in an avalanche of fine print … The ACCC has drawn a line in the sand in relation to the poor advertising practices of telecommunications companies.  The industry is squarely on notice .’

Yet one of TPG’s front page offers remains very unclear about what you get for your money.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Optus fined $110k for SMS spam

By on 14 January 2009 in advertising, How not to do it, Spam Act

csp-central-newsACMA has issued $110,000 in infringement notices to Optus Networks Pty Ltd for allegedly sending SMS messages without accurate sender identification, breaching the Spam Act 2003.

It seems that Optus pumped out 20,000 messages promoting its OptusZoo entertainment service, but didn’t identify itself as the responsible sender.  Instead, it just quoted sender identification ‘966’.  Recipients were apparently expected to work out that this meant ‘Zoo’ in keypad speak.  Of course, it could also mean ‘Yom’, ‘Zom’ or ‘Xon’.

According to ACMA, Optus has paid the penalty and advised that new compliance measures have been implemented that will ensure accurate sender identification is included in all future commercial electronic messages.

More comment soon.

Share
Comments { 1 }