Well, the Barbados Hotel and Tourism Association (BHTA) wants workers to be paid based on productivity. We know there are many challenges with measuring productivity. What about management productivity and efficiency which also have an impact on the bottom line. Let's all work harder, hope we get recognition and proper management and low productivity it not located at the top of the stream.
Did Cable & Wireless Barbados say how many workers are to be laid off. This after announcing with smiles, even fatter profits earned off the backs or fingers of consumers. So staff work hard, the company makes super profits and then the staff are rewarded with what? Layoffs. And what will be the impact of the layoffs on customer service?
Thanks to the Business Authority for publishing a letter from me on consumer concerns about lack of information from the Fair Trading Commission (FTC). The FTC says it wants to hear from consumers but isn't prepared to provide them with information so they may comment based on substance. What does the Mission Statement of the FTC say? That it will be transparent.
Eight out of 12 QEH ambulances are not working.What is the response from CEO Winston Collymore?"If you look at any ambulance service, even in advanced countries, there are always a number of them in the garage because they take a heavy pounding."Well so much for responsibility, health care and the old folk who cannot pay to get to the hospital.

Posted by A CONSUMER

Digicel and Cable & Wireless

Date: Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Subject: Digicel and Cable & Wireless
To: Bdosconsumer@gmail.com

Digicel

I frequently make calls to Guyana from my Digicel prepaid cell phone. On one occasion while making such a call I noticed that the call timer of the cell phone was running while the cell connection was ringing but not answered. This obviously is not normal as the timer should only come on when the call has been answered by the receiving party, thus initiating charges. Since no one answered I hung up and checked my balance which should have been $10 dollars since I had just recharged the phone with the said amount. It was not $10 but $9.12. I made a mental note but did nothing.

However, I started noticing more and more that the same thing was happening so I decided to call Digicel customer care. I was told by a representative that Digicel was experiencing a problem with calls to Guyana and that she on behalf of Digicel was sorry and wanted to know if I wanted a refund. I said no and that all I wanted was for them to fix the problem because I have to make frequent calls to Guyana and I should not be charged for calls that were not connected. The customer representative assured me that they were actively working on the problem and hoped to get it resolved soon.

A week went by and the problem seemed to have been solved. Unfortunately it recommenced, so finally I decided I couldn't take it any more after realizing that I was losing about $20 a month in calls that were never connected. I called Digicel customer care and told the representative that I wanted a refund for the the last call I just made (I estimated the refund to be about 89cents). She told me that I was not going to get a refund because

1) Digicel was not the responsible carrier. It was the Guyanese company that was at fault.
2) I did not know the exact amount of money that was initially on the phone card before I made the call.

In response to this I said that:

1) Digicel was the responsible carrier since I was making the call through them and it was Digicel and not any company in Guyana that was deducting credit from me. They were the ones taking my money!
2) It seems illogical for someone to have to take the time to constantly check the balance of their phone before they initiate a call. How many people do you know that do that? Once you know that you have money on your phone you just dial.

My response fell on death ears and I got no refund....(remember I was asking for less than a dollar). Doesn't Digicel have the technology to see the last call that was made from a cell phone?

With the high Guyanese population in Barbados, the vast exchange between the two countries and the number of people that do not look to see if their money is being deducted for unanswered calls, one can safely estimate that Digicel is getting rich for not even providing a service. Alternatively, getting rich from providing a terrible service. Digicel must be getting rich by just silently nickel & diming persons. Especially Guyanese who might be illegal in Barbados and therefore will not complain.

Please make the general public aware of this.


Cable & Wireless

If you did not know, Cable & Wireless has been traffic shaping and throttling the internet to their customers disadvantage.

See the link below:

http://www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Bad_ISPs#Barbados

There have been many times recently that I have been downloading legitimate files from the internet from sites like Rapidshare, when suddenly the download connection was severed due to Cable & Wireless over agressive traffic shaping and throttling policy. Thus wasting lots of my time as sometimes these files were transferring for over twenty five minutes.

Our North American neighbours have realised what some ISPs like Cable & Wireless have been doing and have taken successful action:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080711.wgtcomcast0711/BNStory/Technology/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20080711.wgtcomcast0711

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1859/125/


Please help save the freedom of the Barbados internet or next we will find that blog sites like yours or the Barbados Underground or the Barbados Free Press are being cut off from the public by an ISP over stepping it's bounds!


Please reply and let me know what you think
A very concern bajan

PLEASE FIND BELOW A PRESS RELEASE FROM THE FAIR TRADING COMMISSION DETAILING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE RETURNING OF BOTTLES.

MONEY FOR YOUR BOTTLES

The Fair Trading Commission has had to recently address a number of complaints from consumers relating to their ability to recover the deposit paid on drink bottles or “returnable containers” as the law properly definesstyles them.

At some point in time most consumers have had the experience of visiting a few of the various bottle return centres that provide the service of accepting returnable containers. The advent of these bottle return centres, have been associated with a number of different policies with respect to the return of beverage containers. For example, while some bottle return centres pay cash when consumers redeem bottles, others prohibit cash refunds and onlytherefore issue vouchers that contains terms that limit the time for its redemption. In any event, many consumers are in a quandary as to their rights when they return beverage containers.

The redemption of returnable containers is governed by the Returnable Containers Act Cap.295. The Returnable Containers Act applies to ‘redeemers’ who are the persons who demands the refund value of returnable bottles. The definition of ‘redeemer” comports well with the definition of ‘consumer’, therefore, a redeemer would be deemed to be a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act Cap. 326D.

The Returnable Containers Act requires every person, firm or corporation who engages in the sale of beverage containers to a consumer for off premises consumption in Barbados defined by the said Act as a “dealer” to pay to a redeemer, the refund value of a returnable container of the type and brand sold by that dealer. The only circumstances therefore in which a dealer can refuse to accept a returnable bottle is where they do not sell the type of container which the redeemer seeks to return, the container is decomposed, cut up, contains a significant amount of foreign material or if it is a container for which no refund value is fixed by the act.

Bottle return centres are also required to give to redeemers refunds for returnable containers under the Returnable Containers Act which states that

A dealer shall accept at his place of business from a redeemer any
empty beverage containers of the design, shape, size, colour,
composition and brand sold by the dealer, and shall pay to
the redeemer the refund value of each such beverage container.

The Act states that the refund value of each beverage container is twenty cents for every glass container and ten cents for any other type of container. Therefore, in the circumstances where a consumer requests to have the refund value of the returnable container in cash and the dealer refusesd to do so or to give the refund in any form other than cash, that centre would be acting in contravention of the Consumer Protection Act for misleading consumers of their entitlement to a cash refund with respect to returnable containers.

Additionally, the Act imposes no time limits on the redemption of refunds. Therefore, it would appear that an attempt by a dealer to limit the time for the redemption of refunds may amount to a contravention of the Consumer Protection Act as this may amount to an unfair contract term,. Also, tThis conduct may be likely to or may mislead or deceive consumers that they have a limited time in which they can redeem the vouchers for returnable bottles.

So with this A prpractice of giving a redeemable voucher instead of a cash refund, some has sprung up where certain bottle return centres do not pay cash but give the redeemer a voucher redeemable at a named business place. Bbottle return centres benefit from issuing vouchers because they determine the time frame where the vouchers are redeemable. In such casesAdditionally, dealers benefit every time a consumers loses their deposit as a result of the expiry of the time limitation. Therefore, these facts suggest that there is a significant imbalance in the rights of the supplier and the consumer to the detriment of the consumer.

Under the Returnable Containers Act bottle return centres are required to pay cash to redeemers when they return containers. If they fail to do so, they infringe the Returnable Containers Act as well as the Consumer Protection Act. It should be noted that the Ministry of Environment is responsible for the specific enforcement of the Returnable Containers Act. The Consumer Protection Act can however address the return of beverage containers because Part II and III of the Act this Act is are infringed whenever the scenarios outlined above, occur.

Persons who infringe the Returnable Bottles Act and the Consumer Protection Act may be liable to a fine, imprisonment or both. Consumers should mindful of their rights when seeking to redeem returnable bottles and in the event that they suspect or believe that there has been an infringement of the Act, they should contact the Commission with any questions or queries that they may have. If you have any comments or queries regarding this or any other matter relating to utility regulation, consumer protection, or fair competition, please contact us at 424-0260,421-2382 or email: info@ ftc.gov.bb,

Public Counsel is a Public Consumer Advocate

I would encourage readers to take a good look at the office of Public Counsel. We have been advocating for the staff of Public Counsel to be increased so that it could handle a larger work load.

The office of public counsel is outfitted with an attorney-at-law; an investigating arm; and within its mandate is the responsibility to educate the public.

Consumer Protection: The role of the Office of Public Counsel in consumer protection matters includes:(a) advising and educating consumers generally on matters relating to the proposed Consumer Guarantees Act; and(b) representing individual consumers bringing civil claims under the Consumer Guarantees Act before the Fair Trading Tribunal where Public Counsel deems this necessary or desirable.

Where a consumer believes that a right that he has under the Act has been breached he may refer the matter to the Office of Public Counsel who may, mediate on his behalf with the person whom he believes has breached those rights. If no settlement has been reached the matter may be referred to the Consumer Claims Tribunal and Public Counsel may also represent the consumer before the Tribunal.

Public Counsel is the only Pulic advocate that exists.

Re: Consumer Question

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

It's Your Turn

Hello consumers,

We have suffered for very long at the hands of the banks, the insurance companies, the car dealers, monopolies, etc.

Many unhealthy practices have prevailed and in some cases although there is legislation there is no policing of the legislation. Hence a lot of automarts and supermarkets display goods on their shelves without the prices; which is against the law. I always argue that the customer should not get any surprises when they reach the checkout counter.

It is expected that the three advocates on this blog will bring their own approaches. Mine would be to do the research on the issues raised and present the findings for your assimilation and decision to take action.

Input from visitors are welcomed. Remember that this is a national effort to empower consumers and not continue to simply take all that is being dished out.

The success of this blog depends on you. It is the place where you can get help and education as a consumer. Did you know for example that every gas pump should be calibrated often and that each should carry their calibration certificate with an expiry date that should be clearly visible to customers... and that if a pump does not have the certificate you should not accept gas from it?

So, let' s go!

Lets use this forum to the fullest

Finally ...somewhere to vent about the poor customer service, high professional fees, ludricrous bank charges, extremely high interest and insurance premiums, we won't even mention the irrational way in which everything is going up in this country.

But listen...we are consumers and we do have some control. What we need to do, is learn how to exercise that control. We are spending the money, so we deserve to be heard and in some cases, our wishes ought to be demands.

Let's use this forum to kick start the process... All you are required to do, is write your grievance by clicking on the word comment or email your complaint /comment to Bdosconsumer@gmail.com
Then we post it on the site and along with the consumer family, we find and seek the answers .
When we have to be very specific, we will be, when we have to be general we will be...at all times we will be guided by professionalism and facts.

Therefore lets do it