New Law to Stop Travel Rip-offs

[anat0l]

Although it's on No News, that's where I found it. Now note that although the headline says travel, the new law is applicable to all businesses (but obviously consumers know where the big fish targets are going to be for these kinds of laws.... just peruse the article's comments...)

New law to fight against travel 'rip-offs' | News.com.au

AUSTRALIAN travellers will now be able to fight back against any unfair airline and car hire practices due to a landmark new consumer law.

The Australian Consumer Law has been dubbed a “once-in-a-generation reform to consumer law” and is set to overhaul the travel industry.

...

The new law introduces the fairness test, which measures a condition imposed by an airline or a rental car company and judges whether it is “unfair” to the consumer.

"A term is unfair if there is an imbalance in the parties' rights, it is unnecessary to protect the supplier and the customer would cause detriment to the customer if enforced,” David Howarth, Strategic Policy Officer with consumer organisation Choice, said.

Now the bolded sentence doesn't make a lot of sense (at least the final clause), but the gist is there - I think.

Whilst I have no problem in attempting to curtail true rip-off artists, this law, along with the recent laws which test the reasonableness of levied penalties by a company, is going to just create a long stream of bureaucracy and a false sense of protection for consumers. Not to mention that consumers are never going to act any smarter (as if the gene pool is already polluted enough as it is...)

Choice: we're here to the rescue...because we know you're an idiot.

 

[oz_mark]

Whilst I have no problem in attempting to curtail true rip-off artists, this law, along with the recent laws which test the reasonableness of levied penalties by a company, is going to just create a long stream of bureaucracy and a false sense of protection for consumers. Not to mention that consumers are never going to act any smarter (as if the gene pool is already polluted enough as it is...)

It is clear from this that you don't have a strong appreciation of why the new laws exists. Primarily the new Australian Consumer Law was designed to replace the various laws that existed across the various states, and to give a common set of laws to evryone across Australia. As a consumer, you get the same protections wherever you are in Australia, and as a business your compliance costs are reduced as you don't have variations across the states.

Overall the law that came into effect replaced provisions set out in 20 other pieces of legislation. Now while it is true that the states have enacted additional legislation to implement the changes this is an implementation detail. In addition, it will largely be the existing state authorities enforcing the new provisions, in place of their previous provisions. The assertion that this creates another level of beauracracy is thus nonsense.

 

[simongr]

So it just perpetuates an existing bureaucracy and all of us get to fund other people's inability to look after themselves? Yay for that...

The average person doesnt need protection from evil corporations they need to learn lessons for themselves - read the T&Cs if you want the cheap [insert product/service here], pay the price for the decent [insert product/service here], live with what you can afford to be bothered about or accept responsibility for making your own wrong decision.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

I'm all for these new laws. Too often there's a few catches in contracts that are hidden away in the 3 pages of small type that is the "contract"

yes, we're responsible for looking after our own welfare, but seriously, i bet half the smug people complainging about this have probably never read through all the documentantation line by line and fully understood what they're signing up for.

if the answer is to buy from a reputable supplier, well we might as well scrap most consumer protection laws, and what the heck, lets scrap product safety testing since if you buy from a reputable supplier there's nothing to worry about since they only have your interest at heart.

 

[drron]

It is clear from this that you don't have a strong appreciation of why the new laws exists. Primarily the new Australian Consumer Law was designed to replace the various laws that existed across the various states, and to give a common set of laws to evryone across Australia. As a consumer, you get the same protections wherever you are in Australia, and as a business your compliance costs are reduced as you don't have variations across the states.

Overall the law that came into effect replaced provisions set out in 20 other pieces of legislation. Now while it is true that the states have enacted additional legislation to implement the changes this is an implementation detail. In addition, it will largely be the existing state authorities enforcing the new provisions, in place of their previous provisions. The assertion that this creates another level of beauracracy is thus nonsense.

I'm glad you are confident.When something like this happens in Health the response is that the States add a few extra bureaucrats to deal with the Commonwealth and of course the commonwealth has to add a new Department to oversee the States.
The problem with all such laws is that the crooks will still try and often find a work around.

 

[anat0l]

If this new law is supposed to enable some consistency amongst all the different laws in different states at the moment, then what real benefit is being presented to customers?

The other main problem is what constitutes reasonable or unreasonable as per the test proffered in the new law, i.e. whether a term or condition should stand or not. There is a lot of scope for consumers to argue their way out of many terms and conditions based on that test, although the most difficult hurdle will probably be proving that the term is unnecessary to protect the supplier, of which the latter often has to argue based on the nature of the business sector that it operates.

Perhaps the law is welcome but the way it is presented as the god-send of finally protecting people from rip-offs and contractual obfuscation is unfair and false. Certainly, I'd like to see how much of that Tiger Airways Airlines program would be any different (think about that hard for a moment) with such new laws.

 

[oz_mark]

Perhaps the law is welcome but the way it is presented as the god-send of finally protecting people from rip-offs and contractual obfuscation is unfair and false.

Well, that is the way the newspapers are presenting it. Understand that the whole issue of unfair terms in standard form contracts is only one part of the new laws. They also do not take away the concept of caveat emptor. It is not about allowing the consumer to wiggle out of their contracts.

The problem with standard form contracts is that one side gets to determine what is in the contract, and the consumer gets little or no choice in what is in there. There has been much written about various terms in standard form contracts from telco's, health clubs and so on.

 

[medhead]

I'm glad you are confident.When something like this happens in Health the response is that the States add a few extra bureaucrats to deal with the Commonwealth and of course the commonwealth has to add a new Department to oversee the States.

From the sound of it, there isn't anything like this in Health as the states retain control with the commonwealth putting in national frameworks that the states need to work within, like medicare. So that is effectively duplication. Whereas this sounds more like the Australia Dangerous goods legislation, radiation safety legislation, Associations Legislation or even something like the Mutual Recognition Legislation. All of which are the one nationally agree "laws" that all the states have agreed to adopt. In the case of radiation legislation the state adopting legislation can be rather complex. Whereas something like the Associations legislation or mutual recognition legislation in a state like South Australia just says "see the commonwealth act and do that". It sounds like these new laws are going to take the second approach.

 

[snufl]

New consumer law

Just read this article Articles - Industry - Managers Should be Wary of New Law : accomnews.com

Just what impacts it will have, I don't know, but I thought it may be of interest to those of you with more travel experience than me.