jeffnz: curious as to any further developments with suggested taking to CC and whether it has been clarified it is illegal.
kenkeniff: Not from me, deal isn't really that great to pursue for the time/effort. Anyone else if free to have a crack though.
gzt: You have the information circumstances and dates and screenshots. It would take less time to fill in the CC webform than you have spent bleating on and on about it.
That was a bit grumpy on my part, I think I owe you a partial apology for the language. Here's a more articulate version:
kenkeniff: Why do NZ advertisers think it's ok to break the law, online
Probably because this issue and several other similar examples discussed above are not being notified to the Commerce Commission. The CC provides a very lightweight process to deal with these kinds of issues very effectively. It takes less than 5 minutes to create a report.
If it is not worth your time to do that, it is not worth my time to explain to you why this behavior is 'illegal'.
Telecom is making an offer to 'buy' which in fact does not exist at all. The only thing they are offering is an opportunity to sign a contract where they will own the device until the contract is fully paid. There is no 'buy' here at all.
Personally I'm guessing this one is just a case of some employee or gung ho marketing for some reason did not follow or was unaware of established advertising guidelines. The cause is not important, they are making an offer which does not exist.
I don't think they don't investigate every submission, nor act on behalf of someone, as per their FAQ's . I don't think they have a huge amont of resources. That is why I think it can sometimes be best to resolve any problem directly with the retailer. When I made compliant to the cc some time ago, they replied to say that it was likely the retailer possibly was breaching the law, but wouldn't investigate further unless they received more complaints from other people, or more information came to light. Instead they told me to contact the retailer to ask them to honour the advertising
I raised an issue with CC regarding a Vodafone contract (which I actually did not sign or know about but which Vodafone insisted the terms apply). Some time later they mailed me to let me know they had raised the issue with Vodafone as part of regular contact and Vodafone had marked the issue resolved. It was.
1. If you object to the advertising - log the occurrence with the commerce commission and/or
2. If you want to 'buy' and own a phone and tablet for $199
a) Ask Telecom if they will honor that offer, goto 1 or or 2b. b) Head to small claims
I have no objection to discussions about advertising issues but at some point they need to be logged with the commerce commission or some other action taken. Discussing the issue and not logging it because there is not a dollar to be made, well that's your choice but I find that a really irritating waste of time. I will point future questions to this thread. /grump
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
