Consumer courts: No appeal to be allowed against awards of Rs25,000
Amendments enlarging scope of consumer protection law sent to law secretary.
The amendment bill would add more offences for which service providers and manufacturers can be taken to court, such as overcharging on products and services. PHOTO: FILE
LAHORE:
The Industries Department has suggested that the respondent’s right of appeal, review or revision on consumer court verdicts awarding damages of Rs25,000 or less be struck down.
The suggested change to the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005 is part of a bill of amendments sent to the law secretary for approval. Many of the suggested reforms originated with the Provincial Consumer Protection Council (PCPC). Council Director Saeed Akhtar Ansari said that the aim of the amendment was to prevent delays in payments when the award of damages was low.
He said that the complainant would retain the right to apply for a revision of the damages if he felt the award was too low.
However, some lawyers who practise at the consumer courts were critical of the proposed amendment. Advocate Farhad Ali Shah, former general secretary of the Lahore Bar Association, said that everyone should have the right to appeal a court’s decision, regardless of the size of the award.
The amendment bill would add more offences for which service providers and manufacturers can be taken to court, such as overcharging on products and services. The amendments would also bring several sectors within the scope of consumer action, including banking, education, security and insurance.
Consumers would also be able to take manufacturers to court should the printed ingredients on packaging not match the actual ingredients in the product.
Shah said that this was a good idea in theory, but in practice it would be hard for litigants to prove, as not many people had the money to get products tested. “If a court awards damages of Rs5,000, and the petitioner has already spent more than that on laboratory tests, where is the justice in that?” he said.
The bill also proposes that control of the consumer protection account be transferred from the provincial government to the PCPC Directorate. The account, which is funded by fines imposed by the DCO, could then be used to pay for lab tests and other measures in cases where the complainant is poor.
The bill would also require the government to appoint an inspector who would collect data regarding allegedly defective products or services and report to the court, in order to substantiate or negate claims made in suits.
Another amendment would extend the deadline for the filing of suits in the consumer courts from 30 days to 60 days from the cause of action.
Overcharging was not in the domain of the PCPA 2005, so consumers could not file suits against manufacturers, traders, vendor or retailers who overcharged on products, or service providers who overcharged (for example, a rickshaw driver). The amendment bill would make overcharging an offence for which consumers can move court.
The bill would include various new service sectors in the domain of the PCPA 2005. Currently, only medical, legal or engineering services are explicitly within the act’s domain.
The amendment bill would bring banking, finance, insurance, accountancy, telecommunications and related services, transport, housing, manufacturing, processing, supply of electrical or other form of energy, catering, construction work, entertainment, purveying of news or other information, medicine, education, security and public utilities within the act’s domain. Industries Secretary Dr Shujat Ali told The Express Tribune that the amendment bill had been drawn up over the course of nine months amidst consultations with stakeholders on loopholes in the Consumer Protection Act. He said that the amendments aimed to enlarge the scope of the bill and give consumers their rights.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 6th, 2013.
The Industries Department has suggested that the respondent’s right of appeal, review or revision on consumer court verdicts awarding damages of Rs25,000 or less be struck down.
The suggested change to the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005 is part of a bill of amendments sent to the law secretary for approval. Many of the suggested reforms originated with the Provincial Consumer Protection Council (PCPC). Council Director Saeed Akhtar Ansari said that the aim of the amendment was to prevent delays in payments when the award of damages was low.
He said that the complainant would retain the right to apply for a revision of the damages if he felt the award was too low.
However, some lawyers who practise at the consumer courts were critical of the proposed amendment. Advocate Farhad Ali Shah, former general secretary of the Lahore Bar Association, said that everyone should have the right to appeal a court’s decision, regardless of the size of the award.
The amendment bill would add more offences for which service providers and manufacturers can be taken to court, such as overcharging on products and services. The amendments would also bring several sectors within the scope of consumer action, including banking, education, security and insurance.
Consumers would also be able to take manufacturers to court should the printed ingredients on packaging not match the actual ingredients in the product.
Shah said that this was a good idea in theory, but in practice it would be hard for litigants to prove, as not many people had the money to get products tested. “If a court awards damages of Rs5,000, and the petitioner has already spent more than that on laboratory tests, where is the justice in that?” he said.
The bill also proposes that control of the consumer protection account be transferred from the provincial government to the PCPC Directorate. The account, which is funded by fines imposed by the DCO, could then be used to pay for lab tests and other measures in cases where the complainant is poor.
The bill would also require the government to appoint an inspector who would collect data regarding allegedly defective products or services and report to the court, in order to substantiate or negate claims made in suits.
Another amendment would extend the deadline for the filing of suits in the consumer courts from 30 days to 60 days from the cause of action.
Overcharging was not in the domain of the PCPA 2005, so consumers could not file suits against manufacturers, traders, vendor or retailers who overcharged on products, or service providers who overcharged (for example, a rickshaw driver). The amendment bill would make overcharging an offence for which consumers can move court.
The bill would include various new service sectors in the domain of the PCPA 2005. Currently, only medical, legal or engineering services are explicitly within the act’s domain.
The amendment bill would bring banking, finance, insurance, accountancy, telecommunications and related services, transport, housing, manufacturing, processing, supply of electrical or other form of energy, catering, construction work, entertainment, purveying of news or other information, medicine, education, security and public utilities within the act’s domain. Industries Secretary Dr Shujat Ali told The Express Tribune that the amendment bill had been drawn up over the course of nine months amidst consultations with stakeholders on loopholes in the Consumer Protection Act. He said that the amendments aimed to enlarge the scope of the bill and give consumers their rights.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 6th, 2013.