Help with Consumer Act

[wynn]

I also take into consideration whether I showed bookings away. But this is very difficult to prove. You do not take details of customers that you could not help. A customer will phone and ask for availability on a specific date. You answer negative and he hangs up.

Get his details before you tell him you can't help him, tell him nicely you already have a booking for that time but if there is a cancellation you will get back to him, maybe he will still be looking?

[IMHO]

hehe, I can only smile.

Die beste stuurman staan aan wal / it is easy to criticise when you're not doing something yourself / teaching grandmother to suck eggs

[Dave A]

I get where IMHO is coming from - and people trying to pass on their own problems to people who have absolutely no responsibility for causing them is a tad irritating to me too.

Wynn does make an interesting suggestion, though.

One of the things we've done quite well as an organisation is when the same problem keeps coming up, we look really hard at ways to eliminate it - or at the very least reduce its impact. And quite often that's done by setting up things way in advance of the problem's crux point.

My best example is our client info sheet on electrical COCs. The biggest problems that gave rise to that was:

• a horribly steady stream of vociferous criticism for faults that have nothing to do with the electrical COC (particularly fixed appliances not working)
• failure to have access available to all rooms (meaning making second, third and sometimes 4th appointments - expected at no extra charge)
• no notification of vicious dogs being on the premises
• appointments to do tests when the client knew the elecrticity had been disconnected

Not only did the info sheet drastically reduce the number of times we had those problems, it has been a powerful marketing tool. And of course nowhere on the sheet does it say - we were inspired to create this because we are sick and tired of being stuffed around.

In similar vein, Wynn's suggestion might just prove useful in ways that might not be directly obvious. Just how much would it hurt to say "I'm speaking too? Your contact number is? I regret the venue is not available on that day.." and continue with offering alternative dates and a phonecall if the existing reservation cancels.

You get some goodwill.
You could add them to your marketing list.
And if you try it for a while, there might be other benefits that were entirely unexpected.

If nothing comes of it - what harm was done?

IMHO - I understand your "setting things up in advance" is the forfeitable deposit, but perhaps there are other options too.

[sterne.law@gmail.com]

Returning (no pun intended) to the issue of the customer who returns the hunting bow.

It seems a misunderstood concept, particularly from the consumer side, that the CPA allows them to just return anything. There is also no doubt that this is misused and also used as a threat. However, only where direct marketing was involved, can a consumer merely return an item without fault or reason. All other returns need to be fault based.

Dave also raises the issue of goodwill, which a venue/supplier should factor in. The intention is not for the Consumer to get away scott free, but neither should a supplier merely "hit a luck", the striking of a balance is the aim (not always easy and not always possible) the CPA is a mechanism to try and level the playing field, albeit tilted towards the consumer.

[BusNavig8]

Well, it is not nearly the same thing we talk about here, is it? The hospitality industry have its own set of risks, many times even life threatening, competition is fierce, market is shrinking and more and more operators entering, Govt taxes and levies invented by the day, admin getting more and more, costs skyrocketing, labour issues getting worse and worse, but it has nothing to do with committing to a deposit and then try and wiggle out of it.


And why not? It is a rip off to pay R250 to enter a CC on line and pay the annual R100 fee, totaling R350. I get charged R1050 for 3 CC's, which the anual levy is only R300 and the work is 15 min on line on a slow connection.

Well actually, our market is shrinking too with the advent on efiling and SARS telling everyone how easy it is to do efiling. SARS marketing budget is much higher than our would ever be with radio and TV coverage, not to mention Kiosks at Malls. The LAW changes every single year. More Tax Consultants enter into the market all the time. Lawyers are now creating tax departments. Audit firms are increasing their tax departments. So please dont tell me its not the same thing, its exactly the same thing. Its the risk of being in business. How many businesses have gone out of business because of this very same thing - no market? Change is a way of life for an entreprenreneur, that what sets you apart from all the rest. your ability to bounce back and change your strategy in the face of these threats.

As for CIPC transactions I do not charge R250 to enter a cc online I charge R50 for the CONVENIENCE of having the work done and you not having to worry about it being done incorrectly, out of time. It is to cover our admin costs and our bandwidth. We do not charge where there is no skill involved. We charge for things where we have developed IP and where we have used our knowledge and skill. Where we have prepared a tax return, spent 4 hours collating a logbook in the SARS format, calculated the rental, capital gains and foreign withholding tax and when sent for approval the taxpayer merely copies the end result into the efiling system at SARS. That too is unfair and it is not even governed by an act. I get upset but realise that I must just change the way I do things, to make the best I can out of the situation. Complaining about the situation and not doing anything will keep giving me the same result. So now I first get a mandate, a proper mandate. Regarding the deposits, I really feel that only wasted costs can be withheld otherwise it is unjustified enrichment. You obviously will not fill it with the same person who phoned previously (well chances are slim) but people will be making enquires all the time or should be. My husband does wedding photography and we get urgent requests all the time.

Another point, regarding the CIPC issue is that it does not only take 15 mins of your time. It takes 15 mins physically doing the returns, it takes another ? time registering as a customer, it takes another ? mins transferring the funds into your virtual account. This is not your core function, however it is ours. How much time have you now lost when you could have been marketing your business which is your core function? Just asking?

[BusNavig8]

I really dont get it...must be a blonde thing


How come this does not fall into the category of a business risk? I mean one cant expect every single deal to be profitable or to go through. There will be cancellations and lost business, either due to unforseen circumstances, twists of fate and just general bad timing including a host of other reasons. How can one expect everything to be profitable? You have to build in a margin in your pricing for the deals that go south surely?

How can you take someone's full deposit, and then still hire out a venue? No, you can only have the wasted costs and refund the balance. Its too easy then for me as a venue to keep cancellations funds, and say, sorry couldnt find a replacement booking and not even try- no costs - no extra staff - no linen - no cleaning - no nothing - almost 100% profit not bad. That's the problem and what the CPA is trying to address.

Law changes, markets shrink, Life happens!

The CPA didnt go and kill anyones' business, just the one's that didnt comply and were enriching themselves at the expense of unsuspecting consumers, of Im sure we were one at some stage in our lives.

[IMHO]

So now I first get a mandate, a proper mandate.

haha, I rest my case! I first get a deposit, a proper deposit!

[Dave A]

Before we get too carried away about unfair enrichment, may I point out that there is nothing to indicate that the OP has a 100% deposit at risk here.

@IMHO
Touché!

[BusNavig8]

The proper Mandate is about changing a stategy when the current one is not working. I dont need to justify myself nor my trading ways. The point remains the same the CPA is the CPA, its enacted. You WILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT LIKE IT OR NOT. It was open for comment. It is a statute. It has precedent. Thats that. Every business is faced with the same issues. The wise thing for me to do is to leave the thread, which I intend to do, it was a ball I should not have hit and an error of judgement on my side for it has just turned into a slinging match.

[Dave A]

The wise thing for me to do is to leave the thread, which I intend to do, it was a ball I should not have hit and an error of judgement on my side for it has just turned into a slinging match.

Please don't get grumpy when everyone doesn't seem to agree to your view.

You said what needed to be said. Your points are relevant. And the posters aren't the only readers.

We spread the seeds. Sometimes they land on fertile ground and sometimes fallow...