Latest news with #CommerceCommission
NZ Herald
19 hours ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Consumer NZ receives 50 complaints about Noel Leeming amid charges
'Our advice to shoppers is that a price promise should be as advertised – without fishhooks and unreasonable conditions,' Duffy said. 'One of our investigations in November 2021 highlighted that the most frequent claim we encountered at Noel Leeming was the 'Price Promise'. 'It was used on every item we tracked, meaning the retailer should match the price of the product if a customer found it cheaper elsewhere. However, some appliances were exclusive to Noel Leeming, so you couldn't find them at other retailers.' A price promise or price match is where retailers promise to match the price of a competitor for the same item as long as certain conditions are met. Consumer NZ chief executive Jon Duffy said the group had received a high number of complaints from consumers about the "Price Promise" practice by Noel Leeming. Photo / Supplied Duffy said Noel Leeming had received several warnings and compliance advice letters from the commission about potentially misleading consumers over the years. Duffy said penalties for Fair Trading Act breaches were not acting as a sufficient deterrent and he believed penalties needed to be increased. Noel Leeming was asked about the complaints received by Consumer NZ but declined to comment. Noel Leeming chief operating officer Jason Bell also wouldn't say how many complaints the business deals with, but said: 'We handle over three million transactions a year, if we don't get something right, we work hard to ensure fair resolutions for our customers.' Asked why the business used the 'price promise' promotional model, Bell said its competitors, including Harvey Norman and JB Hi-Fi, had price match offers just like its own. More questions than answers First Retail Group managing director Chris Wilkinson said the Commerce Commission charges raised more questions than answers. 'ComCom's obviously been working at it for a while. This sector is probably one of the most challenging in terms of pricing to manage. 'Obviously, there are a number of sectors that do these price promises, but it's probably a more limited number of sectors that do it these days because it is such a challenge,' Wilkinson said. 'This is really now limited more towards the home improvement category, so between Mitre 10 and Bunnings. Of course, there's only really two players in that market.' He said the challenge for Noel Leeming in particular comes with appliances, a product category where there is price pressure from several competitors. Wilkinson suggested the promotion may have been a remnant of the strategy from previous leadership. Chris Wilkinson, managing director of First Retail Group, questioned why the Commerce Commission hadn't acted on the issue sooner. Photo / Mark Mitchell Off to court The commission alleges multiple breaches of the Fair Trading Act by Noel Leeming, which is owned by The Warehouse Group, for its 'Price Promise' promotion. 'For over a decade Noel Leeming has prominently promoted their 'Price Promise', which is their commitment to match any competitor's price. We believe their price promise claim was misleading and in breach of the Fair Trading Act,' Commerce Commission deputy chair Anne Callinan said. 'Price match advertising gives the impression that customers will be able to show up and get a match for competitors' prices … we believe Noel Leeming's price promise had many limitations and conditions which weren't made obvious to customers and made any price matches difficult to obtain.' However, Noel Leeming's Bell said they were baffled by the Commerce Commission's decision to press charges. 'We firmly maintain that we have committed no offence and will vigorously defend this. 'We're perplexed by the commission's claim that price matches were difficult to obtain, when over 250,000 Kiwis saved money with our Price Promise between 2019-2021. 'Our terms and conditions are fair and presented just like other retailers, and when we can't price match, we often don't get the sale. Price matching is widely used by the industry, and it helps drive competition, and without it, Kiwis will end up paying more.' Tom Raynel is a multimedia business journalist for the Herald, covering small business, retail and tourism.
NZ Herald
a day ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Debt collector John Campbell fined $115.5k for misleading conduct
Law Debt Collection and its founder and director John Stuart Campbell has been fined $115,500 after pleading guilty in Manukau District Court for breaches of the Fair Trading Act. It follows a Commerce Commission investigation.
Scoop
a day ago
- Business
- Scoop
Price It Right: Consumer NZ Launches Campaign To Stop Misleading Supermarket Pricing
A new petition calls for a mandatory supermarket pricing accuracy code, automatic compensation and tougher penalties. Consumer NZ has launched a new campaign – Price it right – calling on the government to crack down on misleading supermarket pricing practices that are costing shoppers tens of millions of dollars a year across Aotearoa. The consumer watchdog is urging the introduction of a mandatory supermarket pricing accuracy code, with clear rules, meaningful penalties and automatic compensation for consumers when supermarkets get it wrong. 'We're asking the government to step in and deal with misleading supermarket pricing,' said Jon Duffy, Consumer NZ chief executive. 'Too often, shoppers are charged more at the check-out than what's shown on the shelf, or they're misled in some other way. While pricing errors may seem minor on an individual basis, they add up when multiplied across the population. This isn't OK, particularly at a time when people are struggling to pay their bills.' Recent Consumer research found that 62% of New Zealanders noticed pricing errors at the supermarket over the past year. 'This isn't just the occasional mistake – it's an ongoing systemic problem that's adding to the pain people are feeling at the check-out with food prices that are already too high,' said Duffy. Thanks to hundreds of complaints shared by consumers, Consumer filed a formal complaint with the Commerce Commission in 2023. That led to criminal charges being laid against Woolworths NZ and two Pak'nSave stores for misleading pricing. But the problem persists. 'It's already illegal for businesses to mislead consumers about prices, but the current law is not forcing supermarkets to up their game. They have had plenty of chances to fix this. The time for talk is over. It's time for stronger rules with real consequences,' said Duffy. Consumer's Price it right campaign is calling for: a mandatory supermarket pricing accuracy code with clear pricing rules automatic compensation when shoppers are overcharged – such as receiving the item free if the scanned price is higher than the shelf price, there is a special that doesn't offer a genuine saving or the unit pricing is incorrect clear disclosure of consumer rights in store and online tougher penalties and infringement notice powers, like those used in Australia, to deter misleading pricing and promotions. 'We're not asking for much – just fair and accurate pricing that consumers can trust,' said Duffy. 'It's a simple step that would make a real difference.' What you can do Consumer is asking New Zealanders to sign its petition and demand that the government take urgent action. Minister for economic growth Nicola Willis says she's considering introducing tougher penalties for supermarkets that breach the Fair Trading Act and other changes to ensure shoppers are not misled by pricing. Signing the petition will show your support for these moves. Sign the petition: Tell the government to 'price it right' 'It's time supermarkets were held to account. By signing and sharing the petition, you're helping stop misleading supermarket pricing and pushing for real change.'
RNZ News
2 days ago
- Business
- RNZ News
Commerce Commission dismisses Federated Farmers complaint on net-zero banking
ANZ, ASB, BNZ, Westpac, and Rabobank are all signatories to the Net-Zero Banking Alliance. Photo: RNZ The Commerce Commission has dismissed a Federated Farmers complaint that five major local banks acted like a cartel, tying lending to climate targets. ANZ, ASB, BNZ, Westpac, and Rabobank are all signatories to the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, which aligns lending policies to climate change goals. Together, the five banks account for 97 percent of agricultural lending in New Zealand. The Commission's general manager competition Vanessa Horne said no evidence of anti-competitive or cartel-like behaviour had been found. "We thoroughly investigated the complaint and concluded that the banks had made their own, independent decisions. "We found no evidence of unlawful co-ordination between the banks or with the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, either relating to the banks joining or in meeting their obligations under this alliance." Federated Farmers alleged the five banks were co-ordinating their agricultural lending with Net-Zero Banking Alliance strategies which could violate the Commerce Act. It also alleged that this could make it harder for farmers to get loans and increase borrowing costs. Its banking spokesperson Mark Hooper called the Commission's decision disappointing but accepted it. "The reason we made the submission in the first place was that we felt there had been some collusion and there was a sort of collective agreement that would have limited farmers' choice. So in that sense we're disappointed, but we still think it was the right course of action to go down." Hooper said they remained concerned that banks were straying from their "core role of lending money based on real risk considerations and not indulging in the climate change space". The Net-Zero Banking Alliance is a United Nations (UN) initiative that guides banks to lead on climate mitigation in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Its website claims 127 banks worldwide have signed up, overseeing $74 trillion in total assets. In background information the Commission said the Alliance did not prescribe targets for signatories, gave a framework for target setting, and tools to assess the emissions within their portfolios and how to speed up lending towards low-carbon activity. Rural concerns about the reduction of lending to rural based petrol stations , prompted New Zealand First MP Andy Foster to pursue a private members' bill to prevent banks from refusing to lend for so-called "woke ideology" reasons. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
ComCom Finds No Evidence Of Cartel Behaviour In Banks' Involvement In Net-Zero Banking Alliance
The Commerce Commission has investigated and found no evidence to support a complaint from Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Federated Farmers) alleging potentially anti-competitive, coordinated, cartel-like behaviour involving five major banks in New Zealand associated with the Net-Zero Banking Alliance. The banks involved are ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited (ANZ), ASB Bank Limited (ASB), Bank of New Zealand (BNZ), Rabobank New Zealand Limited (Rabobank), and Westpac New Zealand Limited (Westpac). These banks collectively account for around 97% of New Zealand's agricultural lending market. Commerce Commission General Manager Competition, Fair Trading and Credit Vanessa Horne says the complaint, received last December, alleged the banks were coordinating their agricultural lending policies to align with Net-Zero Banking Alliance strategies and targets. It alleged that, in doing so, the banks were potentially acting anti-competitively, in breach of the Commerce Act. The complaint also raised concerns that this alleged coordination could reduce farmers' access to capital, resulting in higher borrowing costs and stricter lending terms. 'We know New Zealanders are very focused on the work being done by the Commission (and others) to ensure banks are acting fairly - and farmers are no different,' says Ms Horne. 'If we see activity that falls foul of the laws we enforce, we will not hesitate to act. In this case, however, we thoroughly investigated the complaint and concluded that the banks had made their own, independent decisions. We found no evidence of unlawful coordination between the banks or with the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, either relating to the banks joining or in meeting their obligations under this alliance.' On that basis, the Commission says, it will be taking no further action. The Commission is keenly aware that, in many sectors, New Zealand businesses are working hard to develop and deliver sustainability initiatives together. New Zealand's competition laws can accommodate such collaboration - to help businesses, the Commission has developed Collaboration and Sustainability Guidelines that can be found on its website. Background The Net-Zero Banking Alliance The Net-Zero Banking Alliance is a United Nations (UN) convened initiative, supporting banks to lead on climate mitigation in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement. It was co-launched on 21 April 2021 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Financial Initiative and the Prince of Wales Sustainable Markets Initiative Financial Services Taskforce, with 43 initial banks as signatories. Joining the Net-Zero Banking Alliance is entirely voluntary, and any signatory may join or withdraw at any time. Banks that choose to become signatories to this alliance make a public statement of an intention to align the greenhouse gas emissions from their lending and investment portfolios with net-zero pathways by 2050 or earlier. The Net-Zero Banking Alliance does not prescribe targets that signatories should set. Instead, it provides signatories with a framework for target setting, resources, global expertise, and tools to help them individually assess the emissions within their portfolios and understand ways that the shift of capital towards low-carbon activity might be accelerated.
