News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by akdor1154 on Sunday July 26, 2020 @11:19PM (#23961965)
The ACCC makes me proud to be Australian.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by jiggawatts on Sunday July 26, 2020 @11:46PM (#23962067)
For non-aussie readers of YC News, the ACCC is an Australian federal government department that represents the consumer interests of the citizens.

This is a particularly important function in cases where there is significant asymmetry in transactions, as is typical with large corporations versus many customers making small purchases.

In scenario like that, a defrauded consumer has essentially no recourse, as nobody is willing to take a minor matter to court. Even if they do, they'll face an army of lawyers that will certainly drag out the proceedings until its Just Not Worth It for the angry consumer. Class action lawsuits, the type popular in the United States, are a joke, serving only to enrich lawyers.

In Australia, the ACCC sues or directly penalises corporations on the behalf of consumers. They enforce laws related to things like warranty returns.

They have a reputation for coming down like a ton of bricks on misbehaving businesses, with eye-watering fines for even minor things like putting up an invalid "no returns" policy sign at the cash register.

As a consequence of ACCC's actions, consumer confidence is increased, so people spend more, boosting the overall business activity in Australia. Companies that behave have everything to gain and nothing to fear. Companies that try to rip off consumers are eliminated from the market, so that they can't unfairly compete with law-abiding companies by dropping prices to levels where legitimate behaviour is unsustainable.

An anecdote: A local computer parts store refused to refund my $500 for a new GPU that was faulty. I told them that this was illegal, and they're running the risk of an ACCC fine. They just laughed at me. I did nothing about it, and jumped through the hoops to return the card to the manufacturer instead. Someone else must have reported them for their behaviour, and next time I was there I noticed a prominent sign at the cash register saying that they've been fined by the ACCC $750,000 and that they had to display this sign to notify customers of their rights. For a local, small business retailer this is a brutal fine, but they're still around and now they provide instant refunds for DoA parts without argument! Plus, the look on the face of the manager who refused my warranty claim was priceless. The system works.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by 9nGQluzmnq3M on Monday July 27, 2020 @01:20AM (#23962440)
Two ACCC decisions that the rest of the world would do well to copy: merchants are allowed to pass on credit card fees to the customer, but the fee charged has to be reasonably in line with the actual cost:

https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing-surcharging/payment...

The first part had Visa/MC howling (because they're normally insistent that merchants hide their fee) and the second pissed off airlines, hotels etc that loved to tack on high fixed charges as payment fees, but in both cases consumers are obviously the winners.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by thedays on Monday July 27, 2020 @02:47AM (#23962750)
Nitpick: these great decisions on credit card fees were actually made by the Reserve Bank of Australia - Australia's central bank - not the ACCC. The ACCC is responsible for enforcing these decisions. See your link above and https://rba.gov.au/payments-and-infrastructure/credit-cards/...
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by bash-j on Monday July 27, 2020 @01:48AM (#23962529)
Also car advertisements have to show the actual drive away price including all extra fees and taxes. If you advertise anything on TV, you can't get away with putting small print in the commercial that changes what a customer would be getting for the price displayed, e.g. unlimited internet. You can't reasonably expect a customer to pause the tv, get off the couch and get up close to be able to read the small print, only to discover that speeds would be capped after a certain amount of usage.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hnick on Monday July 27, 2020 @02:03AM (#23962582)
Drip pricing is very similar and also illegal: the dark pattern of letting someone get all the way through a checkout process and then springing an extra expected (by the merchant, not the consumer) fee or charge on them in the hope that the sunk cost fallacy wins the day.

https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/drip-prici...

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hansvm on Monday July 27, 2020 @03:12AM (#23962855)
Unrelated to your overall point, that isn't necessarily fallacious reasoning. If most checkout processes in a niche are excessively long (free background check services come to mind) then the customer is choosing to spend extra money now in order to avoid spending extra time with an alternative.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hnick on Monday July 27, 2020 @04:19AM (#23963160)
In this case the sunk cost is time, the extra cost is money. So I think it kind of applies. They've just gone with a dual-currency system like predatory mobile games ;)

But I see your point, they're not necessarily overvaluing the time they've already spent, they're trying to avoid doing it all over again.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by gruez on Monday July 27, 2020 @12:01PM (#23966359)
> Two ACCC decisions that the rest of the world would do well to copy: merchants are allowed to pass on credit card fees to the customer, but the fee charged has to be reasonably in line with the actual cost:

Isn't this already the case, at least in the US? https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/307936

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by skissane on Sunday July 26, 2020 @11:59PM (#23962124)
> Australian federal government department

Strictly speaking not a department, rather an independent statutory authority.

Departments are under direct control of ministers, who are politicians, and the ministers can directly intervene in individual cases whenever they wish

Independent authorities such as the ACCC, the politicians have a much more hands off control - they pick the leadership, but have no say in day to day decisions

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by adamparsons on Monday July 27, 2020 @02:00AM (#23962569)
The MSY case was nothing short of incredible to watch go down. They were required to put a massive notice on their websites landing page about it too.

From memory, they tried to hide it or make it tiny to view and ACCC came back and went "You really didn't learn huh? Wanna go for round 2?" and they went back to prominently displaying it again.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by IntelMiner on Monday July 27, 2020 @02:17AM (#23962634)
I seem to remember their website flagrantly warning about their illegal returns/refunds "policy"

With a giant red "THE ACCC HAS REQUIRED US TO LET ALL CUSTOMERS KNOW" etc etc at the top of the page

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by AndrewDavis on Monday July 27, 2020 @02:45AM (#23962741)
The best part of that was it was directly below their banner which had "MSY - The name you can trust"
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by chris_wot on Monday July 27, 2020 @07:04AM (#23963907)
Yeah, but let’s be honest, MSY is actually pretty good. I shop there all the time.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hnick on Sunday July 26, 2020 @11:56PM (#23962115)
MSY? My local had that sign up, apart from that I liked them so it's a shame they closed.

ACCC won't help with individual cases, though they will follow up and levy fines like you've said. So you probably did the right thing for yourself by working around them in the short term. Apart from that you need a state authority, ombudsman, or something else for direct help.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by mianos on Monday July 27, 2020 @04:49AM (#23963319)
Kensington? That one was so handy to me too.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hnick on Monday July 27, 2020 @05:00AM (#23963373)
Yeah, I didn't do full builds from there because it was often unreliable knowing what was in stock but to pop in for one part it was very convenient. As long as you had a backup part or three in mind :)

I'm sure there used to be a bunch of cheap stores around the UNSW area but they might've all closed now.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by mianos on Monday July 27, 2020 @05:44AM (#23963578)
I loved the price but the guy at that store was the grumpiest guy ever. That said he was really nice too. He even gave me a few writeable CDs from an open stack when I tried to buy some and they didn't sell them anymore
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by hnick on Monday July 27, 2020 @09:37PM (#23971402)
Yeah they had zero customer service at both stores I've been to, so it was best to do your research and go with a list and alternatives in hand. They didn't really want to help you discover what you need and their online ordering was very unreliable at the time.

I know a Taiwanese guy though who said he had a few decent conversations with him in Chinese, so maybe it was a language thing.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by waste_monk on Tuesday July 28, 2020 @03:34AM (#23973288)
The problem was people went in with an expectation that it's a "normal" store and that shop assistants would be available to explain things, give advice, and so on. Or that you could browse and eyeball stuff when you got there, instead of already knowing what you needed (though they did concede to having a small sheaf of parts lists near the counter).

If you go in to MSY with the expectation that it's a warehouse that happens to sell things and that the staff are only there to 1) fetch things for you, and 2) handle the transaction then it is extremely efficient for both the business and yourself. No bullshit small talk, you can just go in, hand over a parts list, finish your sale, and leave within 5 minutes of being served when at a normal shop you might be there for 10 or 20 minutes.

It's a shame my local MSY closed down, they had hands-down some of the best shopping experience I've ever had.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by dannyw on Monday July 27, 2020 @12:26AM (#23962230)
Haha MSY?

Several years ago, they refused to do anything about a dead on arrival graphics card that I returned in a week (took time for other parts to arrive). They refused to even test, saying they'd only swap it if I came back within 24 hours!

I went to the manufacturer who took their time and my build was delayed by a month.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by ajdlinux on Monday July 27, 2020 @12:32AM (#23962253)
Note that it's not like other countries don't have consumer protection agencies - the US FTC also engages in a lot of litigation. I'd love to see a comparison of the effectiveness of various countries' consumer protection authorities.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by roganartu on Monday July 27, 2020 @03:37AM (#23962968)
There are already a lot of great examples of how strong consumer protection is in Australia, but I just want to say as an Australian living in the US, my anecdotal experience is that the US has extremely limited, if any, consumer protection in comparison.

The terms “fit for purpose” and “reasonable reliability” give the ACCC a lot of latitude. Most things come with a 12 month warranty at a minimum as a result, and the retailer has to handle it which prevents them pawning you off to the manufacturer and also means warranty replacements are brand new instead of factory refurbs.

One notable example of this is that all mobile phones carry a 2 year warranty because phone plan contracts that include them are typically that long so that’s clearly the lower bound on their reasonable life span.

When I bought a pair of jeans in the US and the crotch blew out within a month I got blank stares when I went back to the store to ask for a refund. I got a refund after much loud complaining but if they hadn’t given in my options for pursuing further are limited and vary greatly from state to state.

In Australia if I was refused a refund in a similar situation I would just have to submit a complaint against them online (via the department of Fair Trading) outlining what my issue is, what I want the retailer to do, and what they said when I asked them. Fair trading then sends them a letter that strongly encourages them to self-mediate with the customer. This almost always works. If it doesn’t then it goes to small claims court where you don’t need a lawyer at all and where the consumer wins the majority of the time.

I would be willing to bet that there are a mere handful of countries (if any) with stronger nationwide consumer protection laws than Australia.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by kube-system on Monday July 27, 2020 @11:00AM (#23965708)
I'd agree that Australia has stronger nationwide consumer protection laws, but that's more of a function of the US delegating many of those powers to the states.

The process you describe for getting a refund in Australia sounds completely identical to my experience dealing with my state attorney general. The concepts of Implied Warranties of Merchantability and Fitness for a Particular Purpose are also widely recognized in the US -- at the state level.

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by rossjudson on Monday July 27, 2020 @12:39PM (#23966736)
Some of the US states have entities that regulate corporations, such as the Virginia State Corporation Commission [1]. In Virginia it takes consumer input, but doesn't appear to take individual case action that frequently.

Years ago I was in a car accident where the other driver was from a different state. When my car went into the shop, I needed a rental car for a few weeks. I forwarded the bill for that to the other driver's insurance and they refused to pay it, stating that this particular driver didn't have rental car insurance on his policy, and there was no requirement that they pay it.

After pointless bouncing around I called the VA SCC and referred the case to them. Shortly after that I got a call from the insurance company and they quickly paid in full, having apparently been schooled by an SCC investigator. When you're insuring a driver who hits someone in Virginia, you are playing by Virginia rules.

[1] https://www.scc.virginia.gov/

Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by WizardAustralis on Monday July 27, 2020 @04:46AM (#23963305)
The ACCC is one of those beautiful things, a government department that works precisely as intended without drama or controversy.
Re:ACCC alleges Google misled consumers about expanded use o... by senectus1 on Sunday July 26, 2020 @11:33PM (#23962035)
yeah, underrated Function of Gov.