One of the more worrisome challenges confronting the state in pursuit of its responsibility for protecting the rights of the citizenry is the difficulties associated with the effective enforcement of laws. We know from painful experience that the passage of legislation in the National Assembly is not necessarily followed by the effective enforcement of that legislation. Lack of enforcement capacity and, sometimes, lack of will, has, in many cases, meant that laws are worth less than the paper on which they are printed.
I have seen a copy of the Consumer Affairs Act, 2004, which, for reasons that I have been unable to determine, is yet to secure presidential assent. Whatever the reasons, the absence of effective legislation of Consumer Affairs is a cardinal failing for which we continue to pay a high price. In the absence of clear and enforceable rules governing customer service and consumer rights we rely on what is loosely described as moral suasion.
The problem with moral suasion, of course, is that it relies for its effectiveness, on conscience and where – as in the cases of many of our business houses – there is no conscience there can be no moral suasion.
I do not propose to address the Consumer Protection Act in its entirety. Rather, I shall draw attention to those sections of the legislation which, in my view, speak to some critical issues that inhere in the notion of customer service as we understand it. I must ask that readers bear in mind, however, that this particular piece of legislation remains ineffective, in the first instance, not for reasons of a lack of enforcement capacity but because its application continues to await the assent of the President several years after its passage in the National Assembly.
The Act, so it says in the preamble, is designed “for the promotion and protection of consumer interests in relation to the supply of goods and the provision of services in order to ensure the protection of life, health and safety of consumers and others.” In other words the Act seeks to define the relationship between service provider and service seeker in such a manner as to ensure justice and fair play in that relationship. The Act also provides for the creation of a Consumer Affairs Commission the purpose of which is to ensure the effective enforcement of the legislation.
“A complaint to the Commission can be made by person or body of persons, whether incorporated or not, who claims to have been adversely affected in relation to the acquisition of goods or services.”
The law says too that the Commission is obliged to investigate such complaints and make just rulings.
I for one believe that so many are the infringements of consumer rights in Guyana that the Commission may very quickly become inundated with complaints to a point where, in much the same way as the courts, it could suffocate in its own work. That, however, is a matter that will be determined by the manner in which the Commission chooses to do its work and whether or not it is designed to deal with matters expeditiously. Of course, all this is entirely academic since the Act is not in force and the Commission is therefore non-existent.
It is the simple clauses in the Consumer Protection Act – clauses that are patently designed to protect basic consumer rights – that caught my eye and it is those that I propose to discuss in this column. Here is what the Act says under Part 1V – Duties of Providers – Vendors and Consumers : “At any time before payment is made for any goods (whether sold as used or unused) a vendor shall provide all information in English Language to the consumer concerning the goods being sold …………” It is of course public knowledge that medicines, particularly, are offered for sale as substitutes and that these are often imported from non English-speaking countries (Brazil is a country of choice for the importation of some medicines into Guyana) and that the sellers in Guyana are really in no position to comply with such a law. Nor for that matter does the state have the capacity to effectively enforce such a law. This problem will, of course, become an even greater challenge if, as I anticipate, there is an increasing influx of goods into Guyana from neighbouring Brazil.
In this article, I shall deal with three other sections of the Act all of which, when the Act eventually comes into force and providing that it is effectively enforced will significantly enhance our culture of customer service. I say this because I believe that, by and large, it is the simple things in which we are most deficient.
The first of the three other sections of the Act that I will address speaks to the issue of “measurement of goods.” The second addresses the issue of warranties while the third addresses two interrelated issues – “Damaged goods sold to consumer” and “Return of defective goods.”
The section of the Consumer Protection Act dealing with measurement of goods affords the consumer the right “to check the weight, volume or other measurement of any goods which he intends to purchase” and imposes upon the vendor the responsibility “to provide for use by the consumer at the time of purchase, appropriate measurement standards……….”
In layman’s language, what the law says is that I have every right, if I so choose, to require that a package of salt, for example, pre-packaged by a supermarket or any other vendor, and being offered for sale as a pound of salt, be weighed again in my presence in order that I might verify the actual weight. Furthermore, the supermarket or vendor has a right to respond favourably to that request and to have on the premises the means (a scale) with which to allow me to verify the weight.
It is of course no secret that ‘short weight’ is one of the long-standing providers transgressions that inhere in our customer service culture. Items of food – cheese, salt, flour, sugar – prepackaged by vendors are frequently likely to come up short and even if you have doubts about the veracity of the weight, you are probably more likely to elicit a frown – at the very least – rather than compliance by the vendor. In fact, the ‘short weight’ practice has become so commonplace that, these days, the consumer does not even bother to voice a query..
I believe that the absence of effective and enforceable warranty is one of the more disturbing deficiencies in our local customer service regime.
This particular deficiency has bred a culture of downright banditry among some vendors who have no compulsion about offering goods for sale without providing the consumer with any protection whatsoever. The Act addresses the issuance of ‘explicit warranties” in relation to goods or services sold, whether new or used. Crucially, the Act also dictates that manufacturers’ warranties be passed on to consumer (a requirement that is frequently ignored by vendors) and where no written warranties are in place “implied warranties… shall apply in the sale of all goods.”
I shall dwell on the issue of warranties for a while because I suspect that consumer knowledge of this particular issue is particularly lacking. Warranties are an essential protection mechanism for consumer against the inadvertent purchase of faulty goods or services though in our particular consumer service culture getting faulty goods exchanged or repaired is far from commonplace. The rule of thumb that is applied by many vendors is that no warranty exists beyond your leaving the place of business with the item.
Personally, I consider refusal either to provide a written warranty or to honour a consumer request for exchange, repair or refund in cases where the item is manifestly defective to be an act so unconscionable as to merit immediate prosecution. People who exchange good money for a good or service ought not to suffer loss in circumstances where such loss is due to no negligence or any other transgression on their part.
The related clause in the Act pertaining to damaged goods sold to consumer declares that “a vendor shall be responsible for replacement or repair at no cost to the consumer any article that, in the absence of any apparent negligence or abuse by the consumer and subject to the standard conditions of warranties within the comprehensive warranty period, fails to provide to the consumer the benefit and uninterrupted enjoyment for which it was intended.” Here is another example of a legal stipulation that goes to the very heart of good customer service. I believe that I have already made the point that, on the whole, traders in our commercial sector are decidedly disinclined to take any responsibility for replacement or repair of goods.
It is pretty much the same situation with the return of defective goods, in which cases, the Act says “the vendor shall immediately offer to the consumer, in exchange for the returned good, monetary compensation to the value of the goods………” Again, such acts of good customer service in Guyana are the exception rather than the rule. I have chosen to deal, first, with these simple and relatively straightforward clauses in the Act because I believe that they impact significantly on the issue of customer service.
Of course, until such time as presidential assent allows for the law to become effective and until the law is backed by an effective enforcement capability consumers will simply have to rely on such ‘moral suasion’ as is to be found among our vendors or else, continue to ensure the injustices that so often attach themselves to our sub-standard consumer service culture.
