Here is a letter received from a consumer and the answers from Consumer Watch are in Red
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Bajan Habab wrote:
I have a couple questions..
I enter a supermarket and purchase a bottled drink for $2.00 at the cashier I am reminded that there is a $0.25 deposit on the bottle, which I pay, search for a bottle opener drink the beverage and take my medication. I then approach the cashier to return the empty bottle and collect my deposit. I am told I will have to carry it to the bottle place outside the next day, this is confirmed by the supervisor/manager in charge.
1) Why am I required to pay a deposit on the bottle?
This is part of the cost of the drink. The cost of the drink should include the deposit. If it does not then there should be a sign in the store indicating that the cost of the deposit on drink bottles is x cents.
2) Why having paid the deposit to A, should I be required sell the bottle to B to get some money back?
You are not . According to the laws of Barbados , the establishment is required to refund you the deposit.
3) If B purchases my bottle for 20cents, and not the 25cents deposit which A forced me to pay, can I force either A or B to pay me the 5 cents difference?
No. What ever is the stated cost of the deposit by the manufacturer is the legal cost of the deposit. However, this is if the refund is done at a retail outlet and not one of the "Bottle Companies" that can be found in some parts of Barbados. A bottle company being a company that deals in bottles i.e. the company does not sell the product.
4) Is A not breaking some sort of agreement with me or some law by refusing to give me back my deposit?
Yes , A is breaking the law
I know it seems small but if the corner shop charges me 25cents deposit and I consume the drink and return the bottle they give me back my deposit.
5) How is a supermarket different? What rules if any apply to the corner-shop that don't to the big boy?
A supermarket is not different. The law stipulates that as long as the establisment sells the particular product, then that business house is required to refund the bottle deposit.
If I visited the same establishment with a bottle, purchased the same beverage and present the bottle which I brought with me to the cashier when the deposit is requested.
6) Would they be correct to refuse to accept the bottle, Must I pay the deposit?
If they are charging the deposit for the drink, then if you take the bottle then you don't pay the deposit.
As a matter of fact , the practise that some supermarkets and retail outlets have of indicating that they cannot give you cash, they can give you a credit note or that you have to purchase items equivalent to the refund is also illegal,
The fact that this happened struck me as odd, so I'm seeking some clarification
Hope that the information was helpful ..Spoke to an officer at FTC and she was extremely helpful..The answers from Consumer Watch are in red ink.
Cheers
Bdos Consumer Watch
Posts
6 comments:
Very few supermarkets, especially the larger ones, refund bottle deposits. The bottle returns are handled by a third party on the supermarket's compound who gives you less than the deposit charged by the supermarket.
It is misleading to have the bottle depots pretending they are part of the supermarket when they are in fact separate entities
Hi Fedup,
If the bottle return is handled by a third party, why are you given a voucher to get your refund in the supermarket? This leaves me to believe that this is no third party affair.
To etablish a third party affair even in the present arrangement, the third party would have to own or rent the premises he/she is operating from and also demonstrate some control of the business.
Secondly, there would have to be a financial arrangement where the third party is paying the supermarket for honouring the vouchers and this is a bit strange considering that the supermarket is collecting the deposit on the bottles.
Finally, the biggest problem I have is that the supermarket does not give back cash refunds, which leaves me to further believe that this is about the supermarket and not about the bottle transaction.
The bottom line is that when I buy the drink I pay the deposit to the supermarket and when I want back my deposit, the Supermarket is giving me back, but in-kind (smell a rat?). The fact that I go to a bottle return is immaterial; that is just another department of the supermarket as far as I "the consumer" am concerned; and perception is everthing. Let liability arise and we will see who the 'de facto' third party really is????
@ rok:
"The bottom line is that when I buy the drink I pay the deposit to the supermarket and when I want back my deposit, the Supermarket is giving me back, but in-kind (smell a rat?). The fact that I go to a bottle return is immaterial; that is just another department of the supermarket as far as I "the consumer" am concerned; and perception is everthing."
You may have noticed that the name (if there is one displayed) of the entity collecting the bottles is not the same as the supermarket.
This would explain why I do not receive the full value of the deposit paid in the supermarket, since they (bottle depot) did not sell me the drink.
Now if they were really agents of the supermarket then I assume that I would get back the full value of the deposit.
I am then left to conclude, that at the end of the day, all refunds issued by the supermarket are tallied and "x" percentange goes to the supermarket and the balance to the depot.
No! No! No! Fedup, it does not matter the name on the voucher and that does not explain why you do not receive the full value.
Think about it this way, if you run a bottle return company and you pay the full deposit, how do you pay your staff? How do you make profits?
So yes, at the end of the day refunds are tallied and 'x' percentage does go to the depot. It is a business in itself. If the supermarket created a business name and then hired somebody to run it, then it is the supermarket's business.
Also, if the supermarket went into an arrangement with a third party to run the business and even give it a name, while that person may be providing a service for the supermarket, it is not sufficiently independent of the supermarket for it to be identified as another business. The supermarket benefits directly from the arrangement.
Remember too that this is a matter of cash flow for the supermarket which will always have deposits that are not yet collected and that may never be collected, but of course at the other end are refunds for bottles for which the supermarket never got the deposit.
If the bottle return does not belong to the supermarket, then I should get my refund at the bottle return depot.
The point I am getting at is this;
When I pay 20cents deposit on a bottle at a supermarket, am I entiled to my 20cents when I return the bottle to the supermarket?
Does the law state this?
If the answer is yes, then it does not matter that the depot has staff to pay since I cannot return the bottle directly to the supermarket.
Presently this does not occur and you can only obtain the full deposit from the manufactuer.
yes,,you are entitled to 20cents from the supermarket or any other retailer that sells the product. It is the law. Take a read of the press release from FTC and it is stated clearly there.
cheers
Post a Comment