| Media item | |
| | VACC to counter consumer advocate push | GoAuto News,
Sandringham
by John Mellor
| 18 Oct 2023 | | General News - Page 29 - 852 words - ID 1954258107 - Photo: Yes - Type: News Item - Size: 698.00cm2 | |
Consumer law groups are planning a major campaign to get a lemon law ombudsman
THE Victorian Automotive Chamber of Commerce (VACC) has released a detailed report to counter claims that licensed motor car traders (LMCTs) are clogging up the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), to highlight the dominance of the private-to-private market in Victoria and to refute the call for an industry-funded lemon law ombudsman.
The VACC warned LMCT members in Victoria that they "will see an increase mainstream media activity regarding a call from consumer-facing lobby groups pursuing the introduction of a government and industry-funded lemon law ombudsman to Victoria".
The report says that the Consumer Action Law Centre (CALC) has led a group of not-for-profit consumerfacing organisations, including the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service, WEstjustice and Hume Riverina Community Legal Service in submitting a proposal to the Victorian Government in their Victorian PreBudget submission 2022-23 seeking the implementation of a government and industry-funded lemon law ombudsman for Victoria.
"The scenario is largely based upon 3000 consumer queries about motor cars to Consumer Affairs Victoria (CAV) in 2020-21. That is enquiries, not complaints," the VACC report said.
"VACC is keen to put to rest many of the inaccurate statements circulating about how LMCTs deal with consumers with regard to faulty vehicles.
"VACC has also for a long time been concerned of the activity, be it via organised crime gangs or other channels, in acquiring and retailing motor vehicles without any remedial action from the regulators and law enforcement agencies.
"Right now, the private-to-private market enjoys 63 per cent of the Victorian transfer market.
The chamber report said that "members are reassured that VACC is well aware of the lobbying process being conducted by these consumer groups" and that it is "well prepared with strong evidence that provides transparency and refutes many of the claims being raised by those groups".
What the research says "VACC has clearly been able to establish that VCAT delays and costs cannot be attributed to LMCTs.
VACC research conducted over a 17-week period revealed that only 1.09 per cent of all VCAT hearings involve a LMCT as a respondent.
This is from a sample of over 22,000 VCAT Hearings listed over the 17week period.
"VACC has assumed that the 1.09 per cent consist of 100 per cent of consumer claims relating to a faulty vehicle.
Continued next page
Continued from previous page "Of course, this will not be the case as many issues may be related to contractual obligations or disputes, or issues where certain Australian Consumer Law provisions, such a being fit for a previously advised intended purpose may ensue, contractual disputes, delivery delays and so on. So, in reality, that figure is generous.
"It is important to note that VACC's research reflects that LMCTs are the fourth ranked industry sector for hearings listed at VCAT under the category of 'Goods and Services'. Key findings include: That the building construction and property maintenance sectors make an estimated 38.4 per cent of listed hearings in VCAT. This figure becomes 43 per cent if it was to include Real Estate Agents IT providers (including digital, mobile phones and other) at 6.9 per cent LMCTs come in fourth in this category at 6.49 per cent That directions hearings and compulsory conferences account for 62 per cent of hearings and that a civil claims hearing or a hearing account for 23 per cent of hearings. This would suggest that LMCTs and consumers are settling in or prior to a VCAT hearing, thus negating the requirement of a full hearing.
"Using this data, it can be demonstrated there is no market failure, no systemic issues with LMCTs and no logical reason for the introduction of a government and industry-funded lemon law ombudsman," the VACC said.
"VACC and its various LMCT Divisional Committees are steadfast that the Motor Car Traders Act 1986 (Vic) and the Australian Consumer Law 2012 are operating in a proficient and complementary manner as far as consumer protections are concerned for our industry. Working exactly how consumer agencies such as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission see as ideal." Why the pursuit of an industryfunded Lemon Law Ombudsman?
"CALC claims that VCAT is overloaded, too costly, timeconsuming and complex a tribunal for the consumer. Because of this, it deters many consumers from seeking justice.
"VACC has seen no evidence that supports CALC's claim. VACC agrees with the adage 'justice delayed is justice denied', but justice in VCAT is two-way; there is no predetermined outcome that the applicant or the respondent will invariably be successful in their hearing." How the industry-funded lemon law ombudsman proposal has been put to Government and VACC "The CALC submission went to some lengths to explain what is referred to as a 'cost-recovery' or 'industry-model of dispute resolution'. Needless to say, the 'investment' recommended by CALC from LMCTs, and the taxpayer is prohibitive for LMCTs and the taxpayer." "It is VACC's observation that the consumer groups appear to show a lack of knowledge or willingness to use the obvious consumer remedies that are available to them." Victorian Automotive Chamber of Commerce research report
Licensed by Copyright Agency. You may only copy or communicate this work with a licence. |
|
|
|
|
|
