The Civil Service Run-around

Ardmore

On January 23rd, I sent an email to odca@entemp.ie to complain about the way Eircom quoted ex-VAT prices in it's announcement of a new (so far unapproved) Residential ADSL service. I simply pointed out that the practice is misleading, and that I felt the ODCA should make a statement calling for the telecommunications companies (the worst offenders) to end this practice.

On Friday, (January 31st) I received an email from someone at the ODCA saying that, as ComReg "have
responsibility for the licensing and regulation of the electronic telecommunications industry in Ireland, a copy of your correspondence has been forwarded to that office for their response and direct reply to you." I immediately replied, pointing out that "ex-VAT" pricing isn't a licensing and regulation issue, it's a consumer affairs issue. I also said I wasn't impressed with this buck-passing.

Today, I received an e-mail from ComReg, telling me I'll need to contact the Advertising Standards Authority.

As my complain was about a press release, and the ongoing practice of using ex-VAT pricing in telephone bills, the ASAI have absolutely no role. And as a non-statutory "self-regulatory" body, they're pretty much a waste of space anyway. (Here's an example of an ASAI finding)

spongebob

PR Bunnies like Gerry O'Sullivan in Eircom so not come under any form of professional regulation.

PR Bunnies have no ethical code, nor do they wish to sign up to one.

They are not advertising (as regulated by the ASAI) because they RELY on lazy Journalists to paraphrase them rather than question them or to quote the press release verbatim isn't that right Jamie (

The department of enterprise has no role in consumer rights save to fund the ODCA , they are right to refer you to Comreg

The ODCA is exempted from the protection of the consumer in matters of postpaid telephony products by some section of the Consumer Credit Act (1995 I think)

Comreg are entirely responsible for the protection of the Consumer in these matters.

Comreg will no doubt ewnter into a slow and elegant consaultation with the dogs on the street Ardmore, you need but ask them.

Then there is the USO

M

Ardmore

Originally posted by Muck
The department of enterprise has no role in consumer rights save to fund the ODCA , they are right to refer you to Comreg.

The issue was with the persistent use of ex-VAT prices when referring to Residential services. It's clearly a Comsumer Affairs issue. (The ODCA is responsible for ensuring that consumers are informed of their rights and businesses of their responsibilities. The fact that the business involved is a Telecoms company is utterly irrelevant, the practice itself is unacceptable and misleading.

ComReg has no role in policing the advertising or press releases of Eircom.

The ODCA is exempted from the protection of the consumer in matters of postpaid telephony products by some section of the Consumer Credit Act (1995 I think)

As I wasn't complaining about a postpaid telephony product, this isn't of any relevance.

Comreg are entirely responsible for the protection of the Consumer in these matters.

ComReg don't agree!

spongebob

Originally posted by Ardmore

ComReg has no role in policing the advertising or press releases of Eircom.

Comreg are 100% responsible for ALL issues to do with the consumer in matters of post paid telephony products (which is a specific and narrow form of Consumer Credit). ODCA are 100% exempted from ANY responsibilty in these matters by a section of one of the Consumer Credit Acts , ODCA will tell you which one if you contact them.

M

Ardmore

Originally posted by Muck
Comreg are 100% responsible for ALL issues to do with the consumer in matters of post paid telephony products (which is a specific and narrow form of Consumer Credit).

Right, so we've established that Comreg are responsible for issues to do with a a specific and narrow form of Consumer Credit. Now explain to me what that has to do with the contents of an Eircom Press release.

ODCA are 100% exempted from ANY responsibilty in these matters

"These matters" being post paid telephony products.

Press Releases aren't post paid telephony products, Muck.

spongebob

Press Releases aren't post paid telephony products, Muck.

Press Releases only prove that 'Ethics' is a county East of London

PR Bunnies are subject to only one form of regulation and that is

Journalists who check their Facts

M

Ardmore

Originally posted by Muck

PR Bunnies are subject to only one form of regulation and that is
Journalists who check their Facts

Press Releases are released to get good press. Despite the oft quoted aphorism that there's no such thing as bad publicity, a public statement from the ODCA that the use of ex-VAT pricing in press releases about services aimed at the Residential market would have some impact, and wouldn't infringe on anyone elses turf.

matthiku

Press Releases aren't post paid telephony products, Muck.

They are no "product" at all! Or can you buy something from a Press Release?

A press release is a press release is a press release - little more then a corporate fart - and they are not a selling offer! That's why they can't be "regulated". They are not even binding for the company in the sense that they have to do what they had "released" - it may hurt their reputation, though.

Again remember, they are published to the consumer by the media, not by the company.

Ardmore

Originally posted by matthiku
They are no "product" at all! Or can you buy something from a Press Release?

A press release is a press release is a press release - little more then a corporate fart - and they are not a selling offer! That's why they can't be "regulated". They are not even binding for the company in the sense that they have to do what they had "released" - it may hurt their reputation, though.

Again remember, they are published to the consumer by the media, not by the company.

Which is exactly why I asked for a public statement from the ODCA calling for an end to this practice. It's not a regulatable function, except by "fighting fire with fire" (or presss release with press release).

spongebob

see the link below

Dustaz

Ardmore, please re-read what muck posted first time around.

A press release is not advertising. They cannot be done for this.

If you want you could write to all the journalists who carried the story without making it clear that the price was ex-vat.

Personally, i dont see the point in wasting any energies on persuing it with any of the above bodies though. maybe thats just me

Ardmore

Originally posted by Dustaz
Ardmore, please re-read what muck posted first time around.

A press release is not advertising. They cannot be done for this.

Maybe you should read what I posted, Dustaz. I didn't call for them to be "done". I called for the ODCA to make a statement that the persistent use of ex-VAT pricing is, at best misleading. I made it very clear that there were no laws or regulations being broken, but that doesn't prevent the ODCA acting in the public interest to discourage dishonest business practices.

If you want you could write to all the journalists who carried the story without making it clear that the price was ex-vat.

RTE added (ex-VAT) comments to the coverage of this issue on their website after I brought the issue to their attention. Their on-air reports later that day still referred to the ex-VAT prices (Eircoms and Esats) without qualification.

Personally, i dont see the point in wasting any energies on persuing it with any of the above bodies though. maybe thats just me

No, it's not just you, the country is full of people who couldn't be bothered complaining about stuff like this.

matthiku

I have to agree with Ardmore in that sense.

Most of the "activists" in this forum are well aware of and can correctly asses the ongoing "deceit" in publishing ex-VAT prices, which may be technically not illegal in a 'Corporation Fart' called press release.

However, the damage done by such deceitful information, when replicated by irresponsible journalists, is to the broader public, who do not see the problem at all.

For that reason it is absolutely right not to keep our mouth shut as usual and let them go away again and again with that and not to do all we can to point out the immorality of such behaviour, exactly because we know the trick and may be already kind of numb against it.

Compare it with the advertising of errcom. If nobody would complain about their deception for instance re. "hispeed Internet", "brand new technology", when actually talking about low speed ISDN, a 20-year old technology, they would never get an official reprimand and wouldn't stop doing it. It may be that their wording is "legally" correct, however, unfortunately, with advertising, it is contrary to real life, a lie (or half-truth) does get perceived as truth when it only gets repeated often enough. Think George Orwell, 1984 !