Lunch with Pipper Hudson and now Consumer Talk featuring Wendy Nolla.
Wendy joining us via zoom this afternoon, and it's my first time chating to this year. So happy New Year to you, Wendy, and thanks in advance for all the consumer crusading you'll do for us in twenty twenty six.
Good to be with you, Peppa, and happy new Year to you and all our listeners.
Thanks so much, Wendy. We've got quite a lot to talk about today, and we're going to briefly start with the big consumer issue that has been dominating both news reports and social media for the last couple of days since news broke around a major drama brewing with Discovery Health, and originally we're we're going to make this our main focus today, but our colleagues on several other shows have done a number of the key interviews already, and at this point, Wendy, there isn't a lot we can add
to the conversation because quite a lot is still in limbo pending input from the Council for Medical Schemes Not so.
Yes, indeed, and they have been very notably silent. Admittedly, I think they the staff got back to the office just this week on Monday, and the main players are mainly still on leave. This is the problem with breaking
stories at this time of year. So there's been really what we want to know from the Council who regulates the industry is did Discovery help Medical Scheme consult you before taking this decision and coming up with the ways in which they were going to claw this money back from their affected members who are estimated to be around eighty seven.
Hundred or not.
And then secondly, Discovery has been very adamant that its actions fall squarely within the ambit of the Medical Schemes Act and various other regulations.
Pertaining to the industry.
And so we want to ask the scheme that the Council for Medical Schemes rather as a regulator, whether they agree with that.
So that's quite key.
In the meantime, the Discovery Health that's not the scheme, that's the administrator. Discovery Health Bee too are limited. Have invited Mark Haimen of Medicheck, which facilitates people's complaints with medical schemes. He's made, you know, a lot of statements about the fact that what they're doing is not legal. It is the regular and they've asked to meet him.
That meeting should take place later this week. So a lot of things up in the air at the moment, and those people who are affected have been saying on various for forums what we do. Some of them actually have had some of the alleged debt, which is on average about twenty thousand rand purpose it's not inconsiderable amounts, bearing in mind that the contributions will go up by about seven point eighteen point nine percent in April.
This is Janu Warry. It's a terrible storm of things.
So some of them that haven't agreed to a payment plan yet have reported that the set off, in other words, Discovery taking some of the money owed off their refronts. They do they are due, so you go to the doctor, you pay. Some of them insist you pay upfront and then you submit the claim and instead of refunding this one person in particular, and there have been others, they keep that money to offset the amount that you owe them because of you, because of the overpayments.
So there's a lot going on.
I don't I'm sure you listened to the interview and that Discovery Health CEO gave our colleague John made them yesterday morning.
It was you know, it's their.
Defense has been to minimize it. They're not saying what the total quantum of that clawback is. They're not even saying how many members are affected. They're just saying zero point six percent, which corporates tend to do because it makes everything seems less. It's to listen, yes, exactly. So they're just saying, you know, these people unfairly enriched. Yes they didn't, there's nothing not of their doing, but they were unfairly enriched, and we've got to protect the fund
and not fair to the other members. And that seems all well and good, but there is now this legal challenge.
But it's it's never so corporates make this sake.
Often there's there's the nitty gritty legalities and whatever, and then there's the court of a public sentiment. And in this case, it's never ever going to land.
Well that they made a mistake for a whole year. It didn't pick it up for a whole year.
These people were blissly unaware and most cases, I'm quite sure.
And and now.
They are expected to pay in full at this time, as I've just explained, the context while the scheme just guess to say sorry and yes, you know how we're going to take our money back.
Well, as Don has just written, having listened to that interview with the CEO, doctor Ron Wheeland with John Maatham, Don's takeaway is you could not help but notice his obdurate refusal to answer those questions that John asked multiple times what is the quantum of the clawback? And would Discovery consider absorbing those payouts? And you know he obviously found it very unsatisfactory listening to that response, and when he has you've referenced it's, you know, the pr storm that comes with us.
Never mind, you know.
The implication for the individual consumers you're affected, the spillover is a loss of trust in the brand that affects every member and every potential future member.
Yes, exactly.
So the main question which John asked quite right is yes, you can understand you can't expect the medical scheme it's a not for profits. You can't expect the scheme to suffer the loss. But Discovery Health Peter I are limited and doctor Ron weed in the CEO of Discovery Health, just to get that right, that's definitely for profit company. So why not in in HORRL or in part get Discovery Health to put the funds, the missing funds, the overpayments to make that right instead of expecting the members
to stuff for the full loss. And he refused to answer that question. So it was a bit of a PR disaster. It didn't help the case. And now we just wait to see how the rest of it.
Unfold and what the kinds of medical schemes comes back with here. And you know, I just I want to say one thing, and I'm a member and I'm on a plan that has this. You know, it revolves around the above threshold benefits, and anybody who's one of those plans knows how complex it is calculating when that threshold is reached and when the benefits kick in, because the way claims accumulate towards that benefit is at a different rate to the way claims accumulate, you know, before you
reach it. It's a bit of a minefield for a lay person to understand it the best of time, So I can understand why people might not have picked up the fact that they were being overcompensated in terms of those above threshold benefits, or that they got there they started being compensated they reached the threshold level sooner than they should have, which appears to be the case. You totally understand how you would not realize.
That it had happened, what had happened like that?
Yeah, And as Dr.
Wheelan said himself in that interview with John yesterday, he was at pains to say that ninety nine point nine nine percent of the claims were all perfect and above board. So why would you think that Discovery had got this wrong? You would just go along with with what happened through
their complex computer sums. You know, you wouldn't think, oh, this is obviously a mistake, because they don't make mistakes by their own account, very very very rarely, and certainly they don't make them for a whole year.
Yeah. Yeah, that's the bige that's.
Not working for them.
Yeah, Okay, So I'm sorry that we can't offer more insight than that. It really is a case now of waiting for the Council for Medical Schemes to enter the.
Fray as it were.
And as Wendy's mentioned that, you know, it's only the third day back in office for most of their teams, So I think understandable that we don't yet any kind of formal response from them, but we will continue to keep you posted and updated on this subject certainly continues
to be a major consumer talking point. The other thing we're going to look at today is one that I think is very pertinent for this time of year, because it strikes me that a lot of people might have been lucky enough to receive a gift voucher as a Christmas gift. And I'm thinking of the teachers who are often given a gift voucher by the class at the
end of the term and that sort of thing. They're probably quite a few new ones floating around in the system right now, which makes it a very good time to be talking about gift vouchers and some of the pitfalls that come with them. So, if you were lucky enough to be given a gift lutchuer of any sort over the first of season, I want to upfront make two suggestions.
Firstly, go and put.
It somewhere safe right now, in somewere where well you remember you have stashed it, whether that is in a particular file or in a safe or whatever it may be, put it in that place right away. And then secondly, go to your diary whether it's an electronic one or an old fashioned fire effects like I still use, and make a note of the expiry date so that you can be sure to remember to unlock the value.
Of that gift voucher before it disappears.
Wendy, won't you explain what made you want to talk.
About the subject today?
Okay?
First of all, I want to say, also take a photograph of whether it's a card or a taper varcher.
Or whatever it is.
And it's because by law consumer protection acts, these vouchers prepaid vouchers, as distinct from vouchers that you get as part of a loyalty scheme that you haven't specifically directly paid for.
So we're talking about prepaid, mostly gift type vouchers. They are valid for three years. The original bill wanted to make them valid for five years.
And industrially at a cadet end, so they've made it three years. Three years, which is quite a long time. But many people myself included, for whatever reason. Now and then you don't have I didn't redeem a foot spa thing, which is my best but I just didn't just.
Didn't get that. It's terrible because.
My relative of mine paid for it and so, but it happens, so you can't. You don't have any recourse if you don't redeem the varcher within three years. The company gets to keep your money, no questions asked, as someone said to be once, but my money didn't expire in their bank account anyway.
That's the way it is legally.
Now today's scenario is what if that gift archer gets lost. Now the old days, all gift fartrees with paper, right, and if you lost it, it was the same as cash because you know, sorry if somebody asked, exactly sorry for you. But nowadays the big malls, the brands within them issue it's all electronically captured.
Right.
So I had a situation just before Christmas in fact where Ashland weekly resident of KDDN but she was in the Eastern Cape, so she bought her a vouch of sixteen hundred grand as a gift from at home part of the TFG group in late November, shortly before Christmas.
She was unable to find it. It was a card, so she asked her urban based mother Veena to take up the issue at the store in om Shlanga, which she did and the store staff got a hold of head office and they, I think through her ID number must have been They traced the card and they confirmed the value and they could also confirm that nobody had redeemed it in fullaw and part. So what did they do?
They canceled it because it's now lost and she was told long story short, that another one would be reissued.
But shortly before.
Christmas, the mum got a called from the store to say they couldn't replace it after all, because a gift card is treated in the same way as cash.
You lose it, you lose it, you lose the value.
But her point to me, Pepper was and a very reasonable one. They know the voucher has not been used, They know because they canceled it, that it can never be used. So they sit in with the money oney six hundred rand and refusing to replace it, in other words, refusing to give either the buyer or the recipient the opportunity to redeem that money, so that sixteen hundred rand
must now be regarded as forfeited. So I got hold of TFG and I said, are you really comfortable with retaining this money under the circumstances.
And the circumstance that.
Meant was you know, you.
Originally acknowledged that was bought.
You canceled it, and you said, we issue some other means of redeeming it, and then you change your mind.
I mean, are you comfortable with that anyway?
The response was to issue a gift card to the value of two thousand and so an extra four hundred grand as a gesture of goodwill and apology, and I was told as a general principle, gift cards are treated typically as cash equivalents and are therefore not ordinarily replaceable
if lost or misplaced. That said, having viewed the specific circumstances of this case, including the earlier engagement with the store, we felt it appropriate to resolve the matter pragmatically and in the customer's favor.
So they've replaced it with some extra sweetening spiggles on top, which seems to be a bit of a trend in the stories we're looking.
At today, it does.
I mean, I'd be interested to hear from any listeners who've had this experience of losing a gift card and whether you tried to engage with a store and ask them whether they would replace it for you, whether their system could show whether it had been used or not whether you got anywhere, Because when, as you said, in the olden days, where it was a piece of paper gone, you had no proof of the fact that somebody else had not picked it up and spent it in the future,
you know, so there was very little sort of leg room for you. But now days or the system able to confirm it cannot be used, and we can cancel it to ensure it can't be used again, it really becomes a harder decision to defend. So TFG didn't about face on this one. That's one group's position. What do you consumer oversight bodies think of the stance?
Wendy Okay, So I contacted the Consumer Goods and Services umbut Lisa.
Brati, as well as our.
Friend of the show consumer attorney Tridy Brookman, and this was right at the beginning of the week, so thankfully they both responded, even though the umbut is on leave until next week. And he got back to me to say, if a supplier refuses to reissue a lost gift card by relying on its own teacencies, this does not automatically make the refusal unlawful or sorry, it doesn't make the
refusal lawful. Yeah, he says under the Consumer Protection Act, money paid for a gift card remains the consumer's property until the supplier has actually supplied the goods or services. If the CA can be traced, confirmed as unredeemed, and then canceled, the supplier has suffered no loss and no performance has taken place. They've given you nothing in return
for what you paid them. A term that allows the supplier to keep the money without providing value is likely unfair and unenforceable, and the consumer, in my view this is the umbert's view, is entitled to have the value reissued or credited, despite what the fine print says, not as a good will gesture, but as.
A legal requirement.
Because yes, because it so.
I think the problem with I think that the Act could have gone further, but it is, what is it going on fourteen years old now, and there should be a very firm distinction between a paper, physical voucher with no electronic backing, you know that's the record, and an electronic one.
So then as we do.
I also chatted to you to Trudy and she agreed, and she raised an interesting aspect, and that is there are two consumers involved, both the giver and the receiver of the voucher, and so I thought it would be interesting to get her views in general on this issue and then how that give a receiver thing plays out, what significance it has. If Trudy is consumer attorney Trudy Brookman, who is with us on the line. Now, Happy new Year to you, Trudy, and lovely to have you on the show again.
Thanks for the happy near t and Wendy Batta and to all of the listeners. It's still likeful to be back on the show.
Thank you.
Can I thank and give us make a few general comments? I mean, I want to zoom in on the on this thing about the two consumers, so I think I need to So yeah, just then the at home perspective that a voucher is equivalent to cash, I understand where they get that. Section sixty three of the Consumer Protection Act says that the money that sits behind a voucher gift voucher that was paid by the giver of the
voucher belongs to the bearer of that voucher. So I walk around in the street and I dropped my Willie's gift card and someone else picks it up and is able to spend it at Wully's, then Wilise is entitled to give them Woolise products in exchange whatever my balance was on that card. In that sense, it is similar
to cash. But if it wasn't picked up by someone, but it's slipped in, I don't know, and it's in one of my old handbags or whatever, and I don't find it within the three year period and I realized, my word, I need to use it before it runs out. Then one can go back. And you're not relying the
non section sixty three of the Consumer Protection Act. That on section sixty five, which says that a supplier such as at Home or anyone else who issues gift vouchers supply is required by the Act to account for consumers property. And it specifically says that the money that's that was paid for that gift voucher does not belong to the supplier,
but rather it's the property of the consumer. And and based on that, you are entitled to then get your money black so you can you can obviously also arrange with the retailer to give you to blacklist the lost gift card and to reissue a new card to you and and use it as a gift voucher if you prefer, but you and also the card has lost either the and here here is where we have the two consumers. So we have the giver and we have the receiver of the gift farture right, and both of those are
consumers as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. And to my mind that means that either of them can approach the shop and say, sorry, the card has been lost. Sorry, the voucher is missing in action. Can you check where it it has been redeemed. If it hasn't been redeemed, here's our proofs that we purchased that, And that would usually be with the giver, right, But obviously, as the receiver, you usually have a relationship with that givern and you can go back to them. And so can you give
me the proof I've misloaded? I need to go back to the shop. I know, for example, that game has contract terms that say if you lose your voucher, you have no recourse that practically behind this scenes despite that, and that's probably an illegal provision in their contract terms for the vouchers. They do honor the vouchers if you come back and say, well, no, it's been lost, they check on their system, the blacklist the lost gift card and reissue a new one. Toe for Yeah, and it
should be as simple as that. That's the only honest way to do it, and it's the only requirement, and it is a requirement of Section sixty five, which says that the money does not belong to the retailer, and that the retailer must handle it in a manner which is reasonably to be expected of a person who's responsible for managing another person's property. That means that they must be particularly careful, dilegent, and skillful in the treating of
that money. So obviously you can't just appropriate it.
Yeah, Okay, less three years have past.
Okay, yeah, again we outside that three year window, it's a different story. But Trudy, thank you. That's short and sweet and absolutely clear that the retailer does have a responsibility to act if you can prove that you purchased it and that it has not been used and the value has not been derived from that card, and you are still within that window within the expiry date, they are obliged in terms of the law to then assist you in blacklisting the original card and issuing a new
one or refunding you as an alternative. Truty Brookman, consumer attorney, thank you so much for that.
Join the conversation.
Join the conversation.
You're with Kate Talk.
We're back with Wendy Noler joining us via zoom this afternoon for our Consumer Talk segment. And we were talking about vouchers before the break, and there are I see one or two WhatsApp starting to come through on that subject. But you also welcome to raise open line questions in the final twenty minutes of the show on other consumer issues.
So before the break, Wendy Truty absolutely unequivocal there in what the law says about who maintains ownership of the value of the voucher until the point of the expiry date. After that, of course all bets are off. But very interesting to see that here that legally, really if you can prove the voucher has not been used, and they're in a position to be able to stop the original form being used if it's been lost, they have to reissue, reissue one, or refund you. Now here's an interesting one.
And Naran asking about your right of return on vouchers, he says, I bought a gift card for my wife for Christmas from a SPA, but she wanted a perfume instead. I tried to return the voucher a few days later so that I could swap it and buy her what she actually wanted, but I was told it can't be refunded.
What would the CPA say about that? Is this question?
Yeah, No, that's that's that's fine.
That's the that's the condition that you accept when you buy a voucher rather than cash. So you are entitled to redeem it for anything that they sell within three years of the date of issue.
And that's that. And we've foken what.
Happens about you know, if the money, if the voucher, the means to access that money.
And spend that value.
If they lose it, and that, you know, that's within their powers to confirm that, you know, it's there, it's been canceled, they have to reissue, but you can't demand that it'd be exchanged for cash. So that's something that you're going to have to live with, unfortunately.
Okay, so arin I either find somebody else to gift it to, or use it yourself, or spoiler wife for the second gift and hopefully she can make use of it. I wonder what everybody thinks of Vangie's opinion. Vanjie says gift vouchers are one of the most distasteful gifts one can gift or receive. Having said that, if a beneficiary loses the voucher, it's clearly not appreciated. Vangie's view is that they should be discontinued. I'm going to disagree with that.
I love being given a gift voucher, and it's often a very thoughtful thing to give to somebody who don't know very well, for example, or for teachers, for example, let them buy what they need or want.
Ah.
It's always lovely when the class, you know, all pat pitched in to buy a substantial gift archer as a teacher gift at the end of the year, rather than going home with thirty different boxes of chocolates or coffee marks or pairs of socks, as appreciated as those things are. I think it's lovely to give somebody a gift that they can spend as they want to.
Wendy, what do you agree with you?
I agree with you one hundred percent. I think there's definite place for them in retail. I think you know that the retailers do well out of them because of the non redemption of a certain percentage. I've never been able to know what that percentage is, because I would like to think it's fairly substantial, but I think it is.
I mean, yeah, I we've just had Christmas. I mean, my daughter was with us. She works in the Eastern Cape, and a lot.
Of the relatives weren't sure and knew that, you know, an hour away, she's got access to well with so that she loves to shop there, and so she was delighted. Were their all these marchers, and they were delighted that she was delighted. So I think, you know, definitely a pla for them.
Okay, thanks for that.
We're going to move on to another follow up on a subject that came up last year, and after that we'll move to some open line cause, Marilyn, I see your voice note and we'll get to that shortly. But a quick follow up conversation around Tiger Brands and the Albany Raps Wendy.
Late last year.
I mentioned this on air, and several listeners sent in sort of me too statements at the time. For those who don't know the backstory. Let me just quickly tell
you what happened. Albany Bread Wheat Wraps were talking about this, the tortilla shaped wrap that you use for a chicken wrap for lunch, or make for kezadias and tortillas if you're cooking Mexican food, for example, And a little while ago, Albany relaunched the product in new packaging, a resealable pack and I thought, great, fantastic, convenient to keep them fresh.
I had kids home for the holidays.
They we had to be friends in and out of the house, and I thought, let me stock up, and I bought three packets, thinking this will be perfect to have for hungry young adults visiting, only to discover when I opened those packets that the wraps inside them were unusable because they were all stuck together like glue and try and separate them resulted in tearing them that they
became unusable. We were able to salvage salvage a few pieces that went in the air fryer to make crisps, but basically most of.
It went in the bin.
And Wendy, when I wrote to Tiger Brand's asking for a refund, I shall we say a really lackluster response from the Consumer Service customer care line. And I have to say one thing first. I have to confess that this is partly my own fault, because when I looked back through the correspondence, I realized that I had transcribed
two digits of my phone number incorrectly. So when they said they had been trying to reach me and SMS me a replacement Varcher, I had not been receiving that correspondence, and that was my fault.
But the problem was bigger than that. The problem was I.
Didn't want a replacement Varcher. I had specifically said to them, the product you've sold is not fit for purpose. My rights, in terms of the Consumer Protection Act are my choice of a replacement or a refund, and I would like a refund. And they kept on saying, no, we'll send you a voucher, and the value of the voucher they were promising kept getting bigger, and I was trying to send you, Wendy, I'm not trying to enrich myself off you. I don't need a five hundred ruand voucher to go
and spend on Tiger Brand's goods. I would just like my money back for the product that I bought and you're legally supposed to pay me that and compel. I was just getting nowhere with that. So at that point you took it up because, as I've just said, it wasn't just me, Wendy, it was several other Cape Talk listeners.
You'd had the same experience.
Yes, And I funnily enough, when I went onto social media TikTok et cetera, there were thousand influences being paid to punt the new, the well the old wraps and new packaging and the great resealable thing. And then I went onto fair Facebook page this is Albany and under all the marketing messages were loads of users saying we won't buy these they stick together. So it clearly was a problem, and the issue for me was that they did not appear to be they being Tiger brands through
via their Albany brand. They weren't acknowledging that there was any particular problem. That's like you know, they usual please DMS or please sorry to hear that, but not saying what they told me when I took up the case, which was that there was a quality issue as they called it, that had been identified by the company with the packaging the new receivable packaging of all three variants of those wraps white brown as well as golic and herb quote. It resulted in the wraps sticking to one
another and causing breakage when pulled apart. That so called small batch was produced in the five weeks between the fifteenth of October and the twenty third of November. I didn't know small that could be because this is a really proper popular product put out by a major brand. But anyway, they had been withdrawn from the shelves, he said. I didn't wasn't proven to win. But by the time that email was said sent to me, I think that
would have been shortly before Christmas. Yes, they had been withdrawn from the shelves.
Here's the interesting bit.
Affected consumers can contact Tiger Brand's customer or consumer care line and they supplied it or an email address to receive a refund. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and reaffirm our commitment to providing safe, high quality products for our consumers.
So that was the message you got from the media team, But Wendy obviously that didn't trickle down to their customer care team because as of a few days ago, they were still towing the line that said we will not issue a cash refund.
We're going to send you a voucher.
And I can actually see they've been trying to phone me while we've been on air, Wendy as see somebody has finally said to them listen. But I mean, this is the issue, the lack of the one hand not
seeming to know what the other hand is doing. If the company his position is confirming that there's been a problem, that the product has been withdrawn, there's been no public statement to that effect, and I haven't seen any any sort of broad communication customers saying hey, we recognized there was an issue and if you've been affected, please get in touch.
We will refund you.
Exactly. So that is the problem, and a lot of companies do this. They just rather keep it quiet.
If it being a safety issue, they would have been legally compelled to inform the National Consumer Commission that would have put out the recalls that we used to sharing with our audiences, you know, the way that they do it. But this wasn't a safety issue, and they were at pains to point that out in their response. You know, you could have there was no danger in eating them, and the shredded version of.
The only dangerous to your laundry because the filling would fall out through the holes exactly.
And you know it was just one big solid mass of these things, which is what which was not the intended way that they were supposed to that, that's not how they communicated and sold all individual wraps.
So I.
Went back to my contact to say, this has happened. Are they going to be what is the story?
And I've got no.
We've confirmed that customers are intitled to a refund if that is their choice. But I also asked what proof would be needed because bear in mind goes back a while now, so most people would have I don't know that that product could well they said they're withdrawn. But so in most cases people wouldn't have the till slip from picking as far from then, and it would have consumed and thrown away at the packaged in. In other words, have no proof of having bert purchased the product at all.
So I said, how's that going to be handled? And I was told we'll get back to you. And I haven't had that response yet. But if it had been acknowledged and you know, apology given and said, look, if this happened to you, if you had to throw away or you know, land, you ended up with shredded bits of wrap and you couldn't use them in the way that you intended to, then this is what you should do. Yeah,
here's how we're making amends. But to it kind of for it to have been sort of forced out of them BioMedia query.
It's unfortunate. Yeah, yeah, later, much later was unfortunate.
And I think, yeah, just yeah, I don't know our corporate I think they try and keep it in house as much as they can rather than public the acknowledging a fault.
But it's you know, it's it's it's not a very wise or consumer friendly tactic.
Yeah, And I mean the reason we raise it again today is simply to let those of you who were also impacted. No, the company has acknowledged there was an issue with a batch. You do have the right to a refund and please do use that that option. You can raise their consumer care line on eight sixty one hundred eight nine one eight sixty one hundred eight nine
to one, or send an email to Tiger CSD. That's Tiger CSD at Tiger Brands dot com and if you're driving and couldn't jot those details down, you're welcome to mail me after the show and I will pass them on to you. So please do contact them if you were one of the impacted customers and ask that they make good on the refund that is due to you. Appreciate that. Okay, Well, we're not alone in liking gift vouchers, Wendy. A few comments in from listeners, David saying gift rouchers
are the absolute best gift ever. I love to give them and I really love to receive them as well. Linda and Claremont also loves them. Madeline says, I love a gift voucher like Walise that you can go and buy your choice of food, clothing, pots, whatever it is that you need and love. So they're a small sample, disagreeing with Vadjie who doesn't think they should continue to be used.
Thanks for those.
WhatsApps, And we've got about ten minutes in hand to take on a couple of open line calls, and we're going to start with a WhatsApp voice note that has come through from Marilyn. I believe a little bit earlier in the show, and this one links to a self and I think let's take.
A listen, Papa, please, can you ask Wendy about the following scenario. My husband has an iPhone. He's had it for three months and something happened with the some part of it, and the I store said that they have the right to first repair it and then replace.
Is that correct under consumer law?
Thank you?
They have no rights to assess it first, Wendy, if I remember correctly, yeah, But to demand to repair.
No. And the celt phone industry is this kind of thing is quite widespread.
I don't know how they get away with it. They're not in a separate category of good. That good that the CPA has carved out and said, this doesn't apply to you.
If whatever you've bought, new.
Or used does not perform without defect for at least six months within that time, you are entitled to return it for your choice of a refund, replacement, or repair. Obviously this case, repair is probably not relevant. But you know a lot of them will say, oh, you have to have return within the first month. It drives me up the wall. No pushback, push back hard, and let us know if they still won't allow you to have the remedy that you choose of those three and yes,
thanks for mentioning it. This assessment period is a problem, and that it's not specifically it's implied, it's not specifically mentioned.
In the Act, and it causes a lot of problems because people.
Go in if they want a refund or they want a replacement, they want it then and there, especially with something as vital as a sulfone that you're using all the time, is central to the operation of your whole life.
And then when the.
Company says no, we're going to send this all for assessment, often it's not communicated fully and the person just hears no, you're not getting a refund or a replacement. What it means is you're not getting it now. But it's particularly with electronic goods. The supplier or the retailers a right to send or for a technical assessment to rule out user abuse. And there are cases of use abuse, so you cause the problem wasn't an inherent defect, so the
CPI doesn't apply. So that unfortunately, there's no mention of that assessment period in the Act, although it's supported obviously by the Commission, Consumer Commission and the UMBUD and there's certainly no mention then of how long that assessment period can be because during that period the consumers being prejudiced.
So I've raised this in the past.
The OMBUD says between ten and fifteen days. Is between eight and ten days is fair because we're talking a week and a half and that should be days, not business days. That sneaky little business word added in there, which gives them so much more time.
Yeah, but to say that they reserve there the what did they say they could repair, attempt to repair?
It?
Is their right to repair before replacing. That's It's simply not since Marilyn, it's simply nonsense.
Month seven, yes, but not in the first six months.
Yeah, so you absolutely have the right to go back to that store and demand that they replace it. Is your choice as the consumer to exercise that right. Thanks for for clarifying that, Wendy. Okay seven two five six seven one five six seven. If you'd like to raise an open line query or comment, and I've got a
lovely comment I do. I'm glad we've got time to squeeze this in, Wendy, because it's it's the subject on which we get so much negative coverage I'm happy to hear a positive and it was a message that came in yesterday from Jillian. Further to our conversations about travel
insurance late last year. I'm sure many listeners were with us that day when we did the show on how important it is to read the fine print of your travel insurance contract and to alert yourself to the possible exclusions that might come into play that you didn't spot. We had a couple of case studies that day where listeners had learned that the very hard way, and in some cases had fought back. But I thought really reassuring to get this statement from Jillian, who had a very
positive travel insurance experience. She wrote in to say she had suffer at a very bad fall while she was traveling in Corfu, Greece, and she says, I want to thank Bright Insurance for how they handled everything. I was medivacked with a nurse, picked up by an ambulance on arrival that caped on international airport and taken straight to hospital. Wow, fab service, all covered. Thank you so much, Bright.
She says.
I'm happy to report I'm now walking again and well recovered. And Gillian, we're so glad to hear that you're back on your feet. But that's that's really great, Wendy. It's nice to hear that sometimes it does work and there's no qui quibbling. The claim is placed, the claim is paid, everything works as it's meant to, and that is what you want when you have a kind of crisis like this far from home.
That's exactly why you choose to swend that money.
And I think it's also a good opportunity for us to say that in most cases, I think these claims do go smoothly and you know, the company, the person that's paid that premium, which can be quite steep, especially if you're going to be away for you know, a number of weeks. They there for them when the bad thing that we hope doesn't happen does happen. So it's just that we don't often hear from people when it's
all gone so well. So thank you to Jillian and to invite listeners for you know, reasons of Balance.
At the end of the show, we got a few minutes. It would be.
Lovely to share other experiences with claims on your home insurance policy.
You know, the wall that collapsed, that it was paid out and you've got.
The security guard until until it was reconstructed or whatever the case may be. I would love to be able to share those as we get them.
Those positive cast balance and also to.
Show ideally, this is how it should happen when we are highlighting the cases where consumers were let down.
Yeah, absolutely, because there is also I think it's good to be reminded that is how it's meant to work, and we sometimes fall into a sort of a sense of complacency.
Oh it's not Africa.
Nothing works as it's meant to you, and you kind of almost start accepting that that's the normal and it's not meant to be. So I think it's it's a really good exact ample to share.
Yeah, yeah, wonderful, So grateful for it.
Thank you, Thanks Jillian.
And listen, while we're giving travel related praise, I'm going to utter the words I never thought I would hear myself say, what a famuless experience I had it a
visa application appointment this morning, wownie. I mean, how many times have we spoken about the dramas and the difficulties and the struggles with those visa applications, you know, and normally just the mere thought of going to one of those appointments gives you goosebumps and fear because they are so stern and so stressful, and so unfriendly and unhelpful has been my previous experience.
And I arrived this morning at Carprgo's.
Offices in town, and all I can say is give an employee of the Month award and a medal and hopefully a bonus to Nita who works at your office in the towers, because what a wonderful experience, professional friendly.
It made it feel for me wendy.
In fact, I walked out of there thinking I feel excited that this trip is coming up and this is the beginning of my adventure, rather than walking out feeling sick to my stomach with worry. Did I have what I needed? It just was such a one hundred and eighty degree change of experience from what I've been used to.
So I don't know whether the ongoing public attention and criticism of how awful the visa experiences can be is finally starting to trickle into some change on the ground, but certainly a very, very different and very positively different
kind of experience for me at Carpago this morning. So and Anita I singled out because she was fantastic, but actually everything about the experience, from the instructions I received before arriving to the parking attendance to help navigating a quite complicated lift system, just everything worked and was friendly and efficient and big, big thumbs up to them.
So yeah, I think that's fascinating. I'm just briefly, I'm I'm absolutely obsessed with cultures, cultures and companies and divisions within companies and all the rest. So the culture there is obviously one of extreme consumer focus and experiencing them in issues of the consumer and their journey, navigating that process and the decision too. We are going to make
this as painless and as freely as possible. So if only that could be the default culture in all visa services, that would be a huge boon for would be traveling.
Absolutely so well done, Capago at the Town has in Cape Town.
Thank you. Last thing I want to say Claire who has sent us a message about the issue with the point Jim in Cape Town. Firstly, please go to the podcast page and look back for the show we did on this topic late last year. It'll be under the
Wendy Nola Podcasts on Primedia plus dot com. But I've also forwarded your particular complaint back to Wendy because Wendy, we have promised to continue following up on this subject of the gyms that have been changed into the sort of premium lux version and what is happening to the customers who can't afford the premium lux premiums. And Claire is making some interesting comments about the pressure that is
now being placed on other branches. So Claire, we have been waiting for Virgin Active to get back to us in the new year, once their media officers reopen. We will add your comments to the engagement that is ongoing.
So thank you for that.
I'm not ignoring your message, It's simply that it's part of a wider follow up conversation that we are busy working on. So please rest assured your message has been received and I have forwarded it on to Wendy to include with the whole bundle of similar complaints that we're dealing with. So to be continued, Wendy. To be continued in studio next week Wednesday when we have you back again.
But enjoy the rest of your holiday break in the meantime, and thanks as always for everything you do for our listeners.
Thanks so much, PAPERL See you next week.
Yeah, keep well until then please, Wendy Nolan reminder you can always reach her via her website.
Wendynola dot co dot ZEDA. The surname spelled know l e er