logo
Optus agrees to $100m penalty for selling phones to customers who couldn't afford them or were out of range

Optus agrees to $100m penalty for selling phones to customers who couldn't afford them or were out of range

The Guardian9 hours ago

Optus has agreed to pay a $100m penalty after conceding it engaged in unconscionable conduct when selling phones and contracts to hundreds of customers that could not afford them, did not want them, or didn't even have coverage to use them.
The negotiated penalty, if approved by a federal court judge, came after court action taken against Optus by the consumer regulator. If imposed, it would be the largest ever for the telco sector.
The Optus chief executive, Stephen Rue, said the misconduct was inexcusable.
'I would like to sincerely apologise to all customers affected by the misconduct in some of our stores,' Rue said.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
'Optus failed these customers and the company should have acted more quickly when the misconduct was first reported.'
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said many of the affected consumers were vulnerable, and were living with a mental disability or diminished cognitive capacity. Some were unemployed, or had language barriers.
In one example provided by the ACCC, an Indigenous Australian, who speaks English as a second language and lives in a remote community with no Optus coverage, was approached by the telco's staff outside a store and pressured to enter.
The person thought Optus was offering them a free phone and felt pressured to accept.
They ended up being contracted to two high-end phones, three phone plans, and various services and accessories with a total minimum cost of $3,808 over 24 months.
Shortly after, they were signed up to a second phone plan with a further $540 minimum spend.
Unable to pay, the person had their debt referred to debt collectors.
The ACCC said unconscionable conduct at Optus affected more than 400 consumers at 16 stores across Australia between 2019 and 2023, and involved:
putting pressure on consumers to buy a large number of products they did not want or need, could not use or could not afford;
failing to explain relevant conditions to vulnerable consumers, resulting in them not understanding ongoing payment obligations;
ignoring whether customers had Optus coverage where they lived.
The ACCC deputy chair, Catriona Lowe, said that some vulnerable customers were pursued by debt collectors for years.
'It is not surprising, and indeed could and should have been anticipated, that this conduct caused many of these people significant emotional distress and fear,' Lowe said.
As part of the agreement reached with the regulator, Optus has signed an undertaking to compensate impacted consumers and improve its internal systems.
The telco has said internal disciplinary action had been taken and that the sales staff responsible had lost their jobs.
The industry body, Financial Counselling Australia, said sales commissions at Optus stores drove 'predatory practices', which continued unchecked because of the telco's lack of compliance controls.
'This misconduct was the result of corporate arrogance, a lack of oversight, and business models that failed to prioritise the protection of vulnerable customers,' the FCA said.
'More broadly, this case is yet another example of why the telco sector needs stronger, enforceable regulation.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Explosive defence argument revealed about why Erin Patterson got sick before any of her lunch guests - as the prosecution case is picked apart
Explosive defence argument revealed about why Erin Patterson got sick before any of her lunch guests - as the prosecution case is picked apart

Daily Mail​

time37 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Explosive defence argument revealed about why Erin Patterson got sick before any of her lunch guests - as the prosecution case is picked apart

Erin Patterson 's early onset of illness after serving deadly beef Wellingtons to her lunch guests was brought on by her preparation of the meal, a jury has heard. On Wednesday, Patterson's barrister Colin Mandy, SC continued to outline his client's defence against claims she deliberately served poisoned pastry meals to the relatives of her estranged husband Simon Patterson. Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty to the murders of Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson. They died after consuming death cap mushrooms served in beef Wellingtons during lunch at her Leongatha home on July 29, 2023. Only Pastor Ian Wilkinson survived the lunch, in what Crown prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers, SC on Monday suggested had been a big mistake. The jury has previously heard Ms Patterson claimed to have become ill shortly after the fateful lunch while her guests became sick much later, around midnight. 'There's a sensible reason for that, because in the morning, several hours before the guests arrived, she was stirring and tasting the duxelle,' Mr Mandy told the jury. 'She was preparing that part of the meal. She was tasting it and that's why she added the dried mushrooms to it. So at least a few hours before anyone else ate any, she had had some.' The jury has heard prosecutors claim that Patterson was never sick from what she ate at the lunch and had simply pretended to be, so as to cover-up her alleged crime. Dr Rogers told the jury medical tests revealed Patterson had no signs of death cap poisoning, unlike her guests who suffered severe symptoms, including organ failure. She argued that Patterson fabricated symptoms, such as vomiting after eating cake, to appear sick like her guests. 'We suggest that if the accused had truly vomited ... that is a detail she would have shared with medical staff,' Dr Rogers said. 'The fact that she never made any mention of it should cause you to seriously doubt this claim and we suggest, reject ... [this claim] as a lie.' Mr Mandy said Patterson's claim that she vomited after the lunch ought be treated as truthful. The court heard Patterson claimed she had vomited shortly after the lunch ended, around 2.45pm. 'Now if that was a lie, members of the jury, to encourage you to think that the poison had all left her body, she surely would've said to you that it happened as soon as the guests left,' Mr Mandy said. Mr Mandy also suggested Patterson's evidence that she couldn't remember what was in her vomit ought also be treated as the truth. 'She can't be more precise about the contents of her stomach. If she was lying, if she was lying to you, she would say, ''oh look, when I threw up, I could clearly recognise pastry and meat and mushrooms in there. Absolutely categorically it all came up'',' Mr Mandy said. 'If she was lying, that's what she'd say. But instead she says, 'I don't know, it's vomit'. If she was lying, she would've said, ''I threw up immediately and I could clearly see everything''. She didn't say that to you.' Mr Mandy further suggested Patterson did not become as sick as her lunch guests due to a number of significant factors. He said expert evidence suggested people who consumed the same amount of toxin could react in different ways. 'People can eat the same meal, some develop a higher grade, some develop a lower grade of the severity of the illness,' Mr Mandy said. He told the jury there could have been a variation in toxicity from one person's portion to another. And some people have different reactions upon consuming toxins, he said. 'So some people have a better toxic response than others. Yes. So depending on an individual's tolerance to that particular toxin or their physiological response that may be different,' Mr Mandy said. Expert evidence further suggested the age of the individual could also play a factor as could the weight of the person. 'Obviously weight is a factor,' Mr Mandy said. 'As you know, Erin weighed over a hundred kilos. Age is a factor. She's significantly younger than the other guests.' Mr Mandy accused the prosecution of providing 'misleading impressions' to jurors during Dr Rogers' closing address. 'So Dr Rogers yesterday in her closing argument, invited you to think about what you would do in this situation if this was really just a horrible accident,' he said. 'And what the Crown was asking you to do is to engage in an exercise which might be dangerous and seductive, but it's not appropriate because it involves hindsight reasons. 'And hindsight reasoning is dangerous because it distorts how we evaluate decisions and actions that occurred in the past.' Mr Mandy further accused lone lunch guest survivor Ian Wilkinson of providing the jury incorrect evidence when he described Patterson eating her meal off a different coloured plate. 'It has to be the case that Ian Wilkinson is wrong about what he said. It makes no sense logically that you would use that method to deliver up an unpoisoned parcel, but otherwise, on all of the evidence, he's wrong; honestly mistaken,' Mr Mandy said. He also said Mr Wilkinson was wrong about the colour of Patterson's other plates, which he had described as being grey. 'Erin and Simon were far more familiar with the crockery in the house than Ian was, and so we submit to you that you would have to find, on a proper and analytical examination of that evidence, that he wasn't right about those plates. Honestly mistaken,' Mr Mandy said. Mr Mandy also claimed it would have made more sense for Patterson to simply mark the 'safe Wellington' on the pastry rather than serve it on a different coloured plate. We submit to you there is only one logical way of getting around that problem if this was your plan, and that would be to mark the unpoisoned one, it's wrapped in pastry, in some way, so that you can recognise it and differentiate it from the others,' Mr Mandy said. 'Easy to do, pastry, in which case you would not need different coloured plates.' He urged the jury to consider why his client would have 'lured' her lunch guests to lunch with a tale about a false cancer diagnosis if they did not discuss the issue until after they had all eaten the Wellingtons. 'On the Crown case, her object had already been achieved,' he said. 'The only rational conclusion … is the lie about cancer has absolutely nothing to do with the intention to kill, if there was one.'

The vile reason a convicted rapist whose brutal torture of a 22-year-old woman left her permanently disfigured is appealing his SEVEN life sentences
The vile reason a convicted rapist whose brutal torture of a 22-year-old woman left her permanently disfigured is appealing his SEVEN life sentences

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

The vile reason a convicted rapist whose brutal torture of a 22-year-old woman left her permanently disfigured is appealing his SEVEN life sentences

A man who raped and tortured a woman for weeks has appealed his multiple life sentences, claiming he was not credited for his efforts to stop the victim from dying. Nicholas John Crilley was handed seven life sentences by a Queensland judge in 2020 after pleading guilty to 62 offences including grievous bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, torture and 18 counts of rape. Crilley's treatment of the woman, aged 22 at the time, in Brisbane in June 2017 left her permanently disfigured. He was arrested eight days after his offences following a dramatic pursuit through the city, during which he rammed police vehicles and carjacked an elderly woman. All three justices of the Court of Appeal on Wednesday said they had concerns about whether Crilley had genuine remorse. 'Even when he rings the ambulance, he does not say this is someone who for 23 days has been burned and abused and starved ... and she is likely to die,' Justice Thomas Bradley said. 'He said she had taken a turn for the worse and he did not know what was wrong ... to call that saving her life is a big stretch.' Justice David Boddice said there were arguments for Crilley wanting his victim to survive so she could suffer more. 'There are actual statements made by him in the course of it that he wanted to disfigure her so she was not attractive to other men,' he said. 'This was about maiming her for later in life.' Justice Bradley said Crilley's letter to the sentencing judge expressing remorse was 'disturbing' and referred to himself 28 times. Court of Appeal President Debra Mullins said the letter suggested Crilley had a personality disorder. 'A fair reading of the letter is that it is self-centred,' Justice Mullins said. Defence barrister Craig Eberhardt told the justices that his client's offences were 'horrendous' and showed 'incredible cruelty'. 'Our submissions do not change the character of the offending. We accept entirely that this remains in the worst category of this type,' he said. 'If (Crilley) had not called an ambulance, therefore saving her life, if he had not pleaded guilty and had cross-examined (the victim) at trial, if he was not remorseful, there would not be a complaint about the sentence imposed.' The justices heard Crilley acted against his own interests by not letting the victim die, which would have made it difficult to later convict him on multiple counts. Crown prosecutor Michael Lehane said there was evidence that Crilley thought the victim was so injured she would never be able to testify against him. 'She had not been conscious for three days. His thought was she could not speak,' he said. 'There was no consideration that she would be a critical prosecution witness.' Mr Lehane said the sentencing judge had considered Crilley's guilty plea. 'The nature of the offending simply overwhelmed these particular mitigating features and warranted life imprisonment,' he said. The justices reserved their judgment, which will be handed down at an undetermined date. Justice Mullins thanked Mr Eberhardt and Crilley's legal team. 'It's important that counsel take briefs that are very difficult matters, as this one was,' she said. Lifeline 13 11 14

The disturbing find customs allegedly made in Aussie tourist's luggage as he returned from the Philippines sparks sickening accusation
The disturbing find customs allegedly made in Aussie tourist's luggage as he returned from the Philippines sparks sickening accusation

Daily Mail​

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

The disturbing find customs allegedly made in Aussie tourist's luggage as he returned from the Philippines sparks sickening accusation

An Australian man has been charged after authorities allegedly found child abuse material on his phone when he returned to the country from overseas. The 63-year-old Queensland man's phone was seized by Australian Border Force (ABF) officers on December 25, 2024, after he landed on an international flight at Cairns Airport, in the state's north. Officers also allegedly discovered child abuse material on the man's laptop and two hard drives and referred the matter to the Australian Federal Police (AFP). AFP executed a search warrant at the man's Cairns homes the following day and seized several more devices. On Wednesday, the AFP confirmed its Northern Command Joint Anti-Child Exploitation Team had on May 6 charged the man with one count of possessing, controlling, producing, distributing or obtaining child abuse material outside Australia. It's alleged the 63-year-old produced the abuse material in the Philippines. The offence carries a maximum of 15 years behind bars if convicted. He fronted Cairns Magistrates Court on Wednesday for a brief hearing. The prosecution requested the matter be adjourned as it was still waiting to receive a full brief of evidence. The case will return to court next month. AFP Detective Superintendent Adrian Telfer said law enforcement would continue to crack down on child abuse material made in Australia and overseas. 'Online child abuse material is a borderless crime, which is why this criminality remains a strong focus for the AFP and our state and Commonwealth and international law enforcement partners,' he said. 'Creating this material is a serious offence. Investigators are relentless and will pursue anyone producing, sharing or accessing child abuse material – regardless of where it is from.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store