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

TPG corrects advertising (again)

tpg-stationeryLast November, we showed why a featured promo on TPG’s web site didn’t comply with advertising laws.  Not long after, the advert was fixed.

In December, we picked up another TPG home page blooper.  Again, it’s been repaired.

Maybe somebody at TPG is reading CSP Central.  :-)

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

ACCC catches fake ‘free beer’ offer

beerWho’d believe it could happen in Australia ?  A trader advertising a ‘free beer’ special and bumping up the price of the main product to pay for it.

We thought fake ‘free beer’ ads were a myth.  After all, beer is sacred stuff.  Who would mislead the public about it ?  South Australian wine retailer Moving Juice, it seems.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 2 }

Dodo advert pushes limits

2008 hasn’t been a good year for Dodo, legally speaking.

In February, the company received the rare ‘distinction’ of an ACMA direction to comply with the complaints handling and billing codes after the TIO noted a rising number of complaints.

In October it broke the record for a Do Not Call Register Act fine.

It ends the year tempting fate with an online advertisement that makes an unqualified and untrue ‘free’ offer.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

TPG does it (wrong) again

Just a few weeks after TPG featured a plainly unlawful advertisement on its home page – which it thankfully later corrected – the company has committed another consumer protection faux pas.

This time the problem is the way that two advertisements with plenty of small print cycle every three seconds, making it nearly impossible to read anything but the headlines.

We think it’s a clear breach of clause 4.1.3 of the Telecommunications Consumer Protection Code.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Oxygen8 Communications signs stupid enforceable undertaking

ACMA has accepted an enforceable undertaking from Oxygen8 Communications, following Spam Act complaints that SMS commercial electronic messages were sent by content providers using Oxygen8′s platform.

Reading ACMA’s media release, we can see how Oxygen8 was at risk of action if it didn’t offer ACMA an undertaking – effectively the same as submitting to court injunctions.

But will somebody please explain why Oxygen8 agreed to some crazy promises ?

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 2 }

TPG breaches section 53(g) of TPA

It’s amazing that CSPs with the turnover of TPG still produce seriously illegal advertising and contracts.

Following November’s outrageous website advertisement, TPG has been found with a clear breach of section 53(g) of the Trade Practices Act in its standard terms.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 3 }

TPG repairs one TPA breach, but now there’s another

We reported in November that national ISP / telco TPG was running a plainly illegal advertisement on its home page.

The company has now changed the advert to come closer to legal compliance.  We still think the ads are obliged to mention that a ‘Fair Go‘ policy applies.

But maybe it’s just as well the policy isn’t linked to the ad.  It sits next to a trade practices law howler that is better kept out of public view.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Big names behind telco finance scam ?

In October, ACCC launched heavyweight legal action against 28 parties involved in ‘bundled services’ deals alleged to be illegal.

There’s growing evidence that the same general type of scheme has been run by other groups, including a warning by the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman.  It also seems that well known Aussie financiers may be involved.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 3 }

Mythbuster: A CSP can’t change its contract instantly

Many ISP and telco contracts contain a term to the effect that the service provider can change the contract at will.  It’s normally followed up by something like ‘so you must check this T&C page frequently.’

The truth:  In consumer and small business contracts, this kind of term isn’t permitted.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

TPG advertisement flouts advertising laws

A mobile with unlimited calls and texts for just $59.99 a month !  What a bargain !  Where do we sign ?

This is exactly the offer being made on TPG’s home page this week.  And why wouldn’t such a great deal be the most prominent thing on their site ?

Problem is that the advert is misleading and deceptive and breaches section 52 of Australia’s Trade Practices Act 1974.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }