Bank of Queensland finances telco scam

By on 2 September 2009 in advertising, Trade Practices Act

1151304_no_liesFinance companies are racing against time to squeeze money out of Australian small businesses before a major Federal Court case shows that their contracts are unenforceable.

Two separate groups of telco companies promoted the notorious telco equipment / finance / servces bundling scam that has cheated businesses of millions of dollars, saddling them with massive debt for goods and services never supplied.  One of these groups has been taken to court by ACCC, which is determined to smash its illegal conduct.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 5 }

SMS spammers suffer ‘no show’ judgment

By on 19 August 2009 in advertising, Spam Act

five-blanksWe reported in January 2009 that ACMA had launched legal action against a bunch of companies and individuals alleged to be involved in an illegal SMS spam racket.

Five of the respondents to the Federal Court action have failed to take necessary procedural steps, and the Court has agreed to ACMA’s application for default judgments.  After hearing evidence about the defaults and the original conduct, the Court has ordered:

  • that parties including Mobilegate Ltd, Winning Bid Pty Ltd, Simon Anthony Owen, Tarek Andreas Salcedo and Glenn Christopher Maughan have breached the Spam Act and / or Trade Practices Act in various ways;
  • that they be restrained from certain conduct, of the kind involved in the scam, for seven years; and
  • the matter be re-listed for directions in relation to any penalty hearing as the above respondents on 18 September 2009.

The case against other respondents, who have defended the case, continues.

Share
Comments { 0 }

Telstra fined for Do Not Call breaches

By on 18 August 2009 in advertising, DNCR Act

do-not-call
Telstra has paid a $101,200 infringement notice for telemarketing to numbers on the Do Not Call Register more than 30 days after they were registered.

ACMA announced its biggest scalp yet under the new law, following an investigation into calls made by an offshore call centre on behalf of Telstra.  Inexplicably, Telstra allowed illegal calls to continue after ACMA had raised concerns based on several complaints.

“The investigation found that inadequate compliance systems, procedures and supervision had contributed to calls being made to numbers on the Register where the consumers were not existing Telstra customers.”

Telstra may be the biggest Do Not Call catch so far for ACMA, but it’s not the record penalty payer.  That ‘honour’ belongs to Dodo at $147,400.

Share
Comments { 0 }

A taxing time for carriers

By on 6 August 2009 in Telecommunications Act

calculatorIf you hold (or recently held) a communications carrier licence, 28 September 2009 is a key date.  That’s the last day for filing an Eligible Revenue Return (‘ERR’) with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (‘ACMA’).

The ERR has a key purpose:  To determine what proportion of the national communications subsidy the client will be required to fund.

It’s a very specialised return and carriers have to get it right … and get it in on time.  No extension is possible.

Telecommunications law expert Peter Moon explains this unique regime.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

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 }

Spot Check: Are your price reduction ads putting you at risk?

By on 2 August 2009 in advertising, Spot Check, Trade Practices Act

NEW mobile phone!! WAS $399 NOW $199!!

BRAND NEW phone!!  $199 – SAVE over 50%!!

1052433_shoppingAds that show ‘two price’ or ‘was / now’ pricing are common, effective and legal … provided they’re not misleading. There are special rules about how to get ‘was / now” pricing ads right. While care needs to be taken, getting it right is relatively easy.

Getting it wrong can be costly, as the former owners of the Zamel’s jewellery chain have found – the ACCC took them to court over allegedly misleading ‘was / now’ price ads in one of their catalogues. In January 2009, the court handed down a fine of $380,000.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 1 }

Optus toughens up mobile contract

By on 29 July 2009 in New laws, Trade Practices Act

optus-5a

Last December Optus incurred customer wrath, effectively torpedoing mobile access to cheap international VoIP services by charging them at international rates. 

At the time, Optus insisted that:

International calls within the meaning of your Optus Mobile Standard Form of Agreement for all Timeless and Cap plans includes calls that re-route or divert to international numbers.

CSP Central asked Optus to tell us where the SFoA said that.  We couldn’t be sure – because the document is a confused mish-mash – but as far as we could tell it said no such thing.

Apparently Optus didn’t feel too sure of its grounds, either.  So it has bolted on a powerful, unbalanced  new contract term that is sure to attract the interest of consumer regulators who have unfair contract terms legislation in their armory.  Today, that’s only Victoria.  On 1 January 2010, it will be every Australian State and Territory, and the ACCC.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 3 }

ACCC hauls Optus into Federal Court

By on 29 July 2009 in advertising, Trade Practices Act

phone-cardIn the latest action in its war on trade practices non-compliance in the telco sector, ACCC has taken Federal Court action against a wholly owned subsidiary of Optus Mobile Pty Ltd.

Prepaid Services Pty Ltd supplies phone cards that are resold by an independent company Boost Tel Pty Ltd. 

ACCC alleges that Prepaid and Boost were involved in false advertising.

  Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 1 }

Component pricing seminar notes available

By on 21 July 2009 in advertising, New laws, Trade Practices Act

funnytel-2-smallSeminar notes from today’s popular ‘Component Pricing Law’ seminar at Logie-Smith Lanyon Lawyers are now available for download.

Delivered in our trademark style … plain english guaranteed … the seminar offered practical and expert insights into living harmoniously with the new trade practices law.

We’ll offer a repeat session soon … keep watching.

Share
Comments { 2 }

FunnyTel introduces unit pricing in new mega-value FAT plans

By on 18 July 2009 in advertising, Funnytel, iiNet Case, Trade Practices Act

1180827_double_cheeseburgerComms industry leader FunnyTel today announced its ground-breaking FAT plans. 

No stranger to innovation – FunnyTel was Australia’s first ISP to introduce the random number billing that has since proved so popular with Telstra management – the FAT plans include Australia’s first internet unit pricing scheme.

‘We read about the Government’s idea for unit pricing with groceries,’ says FunnyTel spokesman Chad Blake.  ‘And we thought “This makes sense.”  Why should customers pay for an 80 gigs download allowance and not know exactly how many P2P movies they’ll get for their dough ?’

‘We’re actually thinking of applying to the ACCC for an award for this,’ said Blake.  ‘Our 2 New Hollywood Releases a Night’ plan is a revolution in truth-in-advertising.  ‘And that’s A-FACT !’ says Blake with a cheeky wink.

We asked Chad if he thought that other market leaders like iiNet would adopt the system. 
Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }