‘You break, you pay’ sign holds no sway
Woman who broke a vase was landed with the bill for a pair — but should not have paid for either
IT’S nonsense that so many suppliers, big and small, still plead ignorance of basic consumer legislation.
When the Consumer Protection Act came into force in 2011, it was groundbreaking legislation. It shifted the balance of power to consumers like no other law had done before. Its farreaching provisions — on a par with the best in the world — were well publicised.
Local companies, other than those operating from under a rock, cannot pretend they didn’t know. Despite this, four years later, plenty of suppliers are carrying on business as usual.
One such company is Design@Home, an interiors, furniture and flooring business with two stores in the Free State.
As customer Sandra Stevens left its Bethlehem store, her bag accidentally knocked over a vase on display, breaking it. There was a sign up in the store, stating: “You break you pay”.
Embarrassed, the 49-year-old picked up the broken vase and went to the till to pay for it. To her horror, the salesperson informed her the vase was part of a set and she would have to pay for both.
“I protested,” said Stevens. “But to save myself from a scene, I relented and paid.” The total cost was R1 040.
But Stevens refused to let the matter rest, leaving her contact details with the employee, asking that the store owner, apparently on holiday at the time, call her to justify the second vase charge.
When this didn’t happen, she called the store again. Again, despite follow-up, promises to respond didn’t materialise and an upset Stevens e-mailed me.
“I am unhappy that I was forced to pay for the second vase when I only broke one,” she said. “I am now sitting with an item that I did not want or need . . . is this legal?”
No, none of what Stevens was subjected to is legal. The store had no right to demand payment for the smashed vase, much less the second. The act is very clear on such cases: the only time a supplier can demand payment for a damaged item is if it was a result of recklessness, malicious behaviour, gross negligence or criminal conduct.
So, as I’ve written before, unless you’re the kind of customer who swings a baseball bat inside a store, stages trolley races in the aisle or allows your children to run amok, a supplier is not allowed to charge you for loss or damage.
Accidents happen (the best of us have unintentionally knocked things off a shelf) and a supplier has to factor this into the cost of running a business. As for signs that say otherwise, they’re illegal, too, because they mislead consumers into waiving their rights.
When I contacted the store’s co-owner, Eric Viviers, he said the full amount would be refunded on return of the undamaged vase. He claimed the store had been trying to reach Stevens prior to my intervention but had been unsuccessful.
But why was she treated so badly in the first place?
It seems Viviers and the temporary salesperson were “unaware” of the provisions of the act. Clearly.
And the store’s noncompliant sign?
“It’s already come down,” said Viviers.
Lesson for consumers: know your rights; it’ll prevent you becoming a victim.
Lesson for business: know your consumer obligations. You have no right trading if you don’t. And it’s going to get you into trouble.
Nobody can plead ignorance of the act. Google it, download it. If you don’t fancy legalese — few of us do — there are other, more user-friendly ways of learning more, including practical information on the National Consumer Commission’s website and those of the various industry ombuds, including motor, banking, and consumer goods and services.
There’s even a guidebook, The Consumer Protection Act Made Easy, compiled by advocate Neville Melville (now the consumer goods and services ombud), that explains the act sim- ply. There is absolutely no excuse for ignorance.
Tune in to Power FM 98.7’s ‘Power Breakfast’ (DStv audio channel 889) at 8.50am tomorrow to hear more from Megan
I protested. But to save myself from a scene, I paid