Speaker 1: Lunch with Pipper Hudson and now Consumer Talk featuring Wendy Nolla.
Speaker 2: Wendy joining us via zoom this afternoon, and it's my
Speaker 2: first time chating to this year. So happy New Year
Speaker 2: to you, Wendy, and thanks in advance for all the
Speaker 2: consumer crusading you'll do for us in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 3: Good to be with you, Peppa, and happy new Year
Speaker 3: to you and all our listeners.
Speaker 2: Thanks so much, Wendy. We've got quite a lot to
Speaker 2: talk about today, and we're going to briefly start with
Speaker 2: the big consumer issue that has been dominating both news
Speaker 2: reports and social media for the last couple of days
Speaker 2: since news broke around a major drama brewing with Discovery Health,
Speaker 2: and originally we're we're going to make this our main
Speaker 2: focus today, but our colleagues on several other shows have
Speaker 2: done a number of the key interviews already, and at
Speaker 2: this point, Wendy, there isn't a lot we can add
Speaker 2: to the conversation because quite a lot is still in
Speaker 2: limbo pending input from the Council for Medical Schemes Not so.
Speaker 4: Yes, indeed, and they have been very notably silent. Admittedly,
Speaker 4: I think they the staff got back to the office
Speaker 4: just this week on Monday, and the main players are
Speaker 4: mainly still on leave. This is the problem with breaking
Speaker 4: stories at this time of year. So there's been really
Speaker 4: what we want to know from the Council who regulates
Speaker 4: the industry is did Discovery help Medical Scheme consult you
Speaker 4: before taking this decision and coming up with the ways
Speaker 4: in which they were going to claw this money back
Speaker 4: from their affected members who are estimated to be around
Speaker 4: eighty seven.
Speaker 3: Hundred or not.
Speaker 4: And then secondly, Discovery has been very adamant that its
Speaker 4: actions fall squarely within the ambit of the Medical Schemes
Speaker 4: Act and various other regulations.
Speaker 3: Pertaining to the industry.
Speaker 4: And so we want to ask the scheme that the
Speaker 4: Council for Medical Schemes rather as a regulator, whether they
Speaker 4: agree with that.
Speaker 3: So that's quite key.
Speaker 4: In the meantime, the Discovery Health that's not the scheme,
Speaker 4: that's the administrator. Discovery Health Bee too are limited. Have
Speaker 4: invited Mark Haimen of Medicheck, which facilitates people's complaints with
Speaker 4: medical schemes. He's made, you know, a lot of statements
Speaker 4: about the fact that what they're doing is not legal.
Speaker 4: It is the regular and they've asked to meet him.
Speaker 4: That meeting should take place later this week. So a
Speaker 4: lot of things up in the air at the moment,
Speaker 4: and those people who are affected have been saying on
Speaker 4: various for forums what we do. Some of them actually
Speaker 4: have had some of the alleged debt, which is on
Speaker 4: average about twenty thousand rand purpose it's not inconsiderable amounts,
Speaker 4: bearing in mind that the contributions will go up by
Speaker 4: about seven point eighteen point nine percent in April.
Speaker 3: This is Janu Warry. It's a terrible storm of things.
Speaker 4: So some of them that haven't agreed to a payment
Speaker 4: plan yet have reported that the set off, in other words,
Speaker 4: Discovery taking some of the money owed off their refronts.
Speaker 4: They do they are due, so you go to the doctor,
Speaker 4: you pay. Some of them insist you pay upfront and
Speaker 4: then you submit the claim and instead of refunding this
Speaker 4: one person in particular, and there have been others, they
Speaker 4: keep that money to offset the amount that you owe
Speaker 4: them because of you, because of the overpayments.
Speaker 3: So there's a lot going on.
Speaker 4: I don't I'm sure you listened to the interview and
Speaker 4: that Discovery Health CEO gave our colleague John made them
Speaker 4: yesterday morning.
Speaker 3: It was you know, it's their.
Speaker 4: Defense has been to minimize it. They're not saying what
Speaker 4: the total quantum of that clawback is. They're not even
Speaker 4: saying how many members are affected. They're just saying zero
Speaker 4: point six percent, which corporates tend to do because it
Speaker 4: makes everything seems less. It's to listen, yes, exactly. So
Speaker 4: they're just saying, you know, these people unfairly enriched. Yes
Speaker 4: they didn't, there's nothing not of their doing, but they
Speaker 4: were unfairly enriched, and we've got to protect the fund
Speaker 4: and not fair to the other members. And that seems
Speaker 4: all well and good, but there is now this legal challenge.
Speaker 3: But it's it's never so corporates make this sake.
Speaker 4: Often there's there's the nitty gritty legalities and whatever, and
Speaker 4: then there's the court of a public sentiment. And in
Speaker 4: this case, it's never ever going to land.
Speaker 3: Well that they made a mistake for a whole year.
Speaker 3: It didn't pick it up for a whole year.
Speaker 4: These people were blissly unaware and most cases, I'm quite sure.
Speaker 3: And and now.
Speaker 4: They are expected to pay in full at this time,
Speaker 4: as I've just explained, the context while the scheme just
Speaker 4: guess to say sorry and yes, you know how we're
Speaker 4: going to take our money back.
Speaker 2: Well, as Don has just written, having listened to that
Speaker 2: interview with the CEO, doctor Ron Wheeland with John Maatham,
Speaker 2: Don's takeaway is you could not help but notice his
Speaker 2: obdurate refusal to answer those questions that John asked multiple
Speaker 2: times what is the quantum of the clawback? And would
Speaker 2: Discovery consider absorbing those payouts? And you know he obviously
Speaker 2: found it very unsatisfactory listening to that response, and when
Speaker 2: he has you've referenced it's, you know, the pr storm
Speaker 2: that comes with us.
Speaker 1: Never mind, you know.
Speaker 2: The implication for the individual consumers you're affected, the spillover
Speaker 2: is a loss of trust in the brand that affects
Speaker 2: every member and every potential future member.
Speaker 3: Yes, exactly.
Speaker 4: So the main question which John asked quite right is yes,
Speaker 4: you can understand you can't expect the medical scheme it's
Speaker 4: a not for profits. You can't expect the scheme to
Speaker 4: suffer the loss. But Discovery Health Peter I are limited
Speaker 4: and doctor Ron weed in the CEO of Discovery Health,
Speaker 4: just to get that right, that's definitely for profit company.
Speaker 4: So why not in in HORRL or in part get
Speaker 4: Discovery Health to put the funds, the missing funds, the
Speaker 4: overpayments to make that right instead of expecting the members
Speaker 4: to stuff for the full loss. And he refused to
Speaker 4: answer that question. So it was a bit of a
Speaker 4: PR disaster. It didn't help the case. And now we
Speaker 4: just wait to see how the rest of it.
Speaker 2: Unfold and what the kinds of medical schemes comes back
Speaker 2: with here. And you know, I just I want to
Speaker 2: say one thing, and I'm a member and I'm on
Speaker 2: a plan that has this. You know, it revolves around
Speaker 2: the above threshold benefits, and anybody who's one of those
Speaker 2: plans knows how complex it is calculating when that threshold
Speaker 2: is reached and when the benefits kick in, because the
Speaker 2: way claims accumulate towards that benefit is at a different
Speaker 2: rate to the way claims accumulate, you know, before you
Speaker 2: reach it. It's a bit of a minefield for a
Speaker 2: lay person to understand it the best of time, So
Speaker 2: I can understand why people might not have picked up
Speaker 2: the fact that they were being overcompensated in terms of
Speaker 2: those above threshold benefits, or that they got there they
Speaker 2: started being compensated they reached the threshold level sooner than
Speaker 2: they should have, which appears to be the case. You
Speaker 2: totally understand how you would not realize.
Speaker 3: That it had happened, what had happened like that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, And as Dr.
Speaker 4: Wheelan said himself in that interview with John yesterday, he
Speaker 4: was at pains to say that ninety nine point nine
Speaker 4: nine percent of the claims were all perfect and above board.
Speaker 4: So why would you think that Discovery had got this wrong?
Speaker 4: You would just go along with with what happened through
Speaker 4: their complex computer sums. You know, you wouldn't think, oh,
Speaker 4: this is obviously a mistake, because they don't make mistakes
Speaker 4: by their own account, very very very rarely, and certainly
Speaker 4: they don't make them for a whole year.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, that's the bige that's.
Speaker 3: Not working for them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Okay, So I'm sorry that we can't offer more
Speaker 2: insight than that. It really is a case now of
Speaker 2: waiting for the Council for Medical Schemes to enter the.
Speaker 1: Fray as it were.
Speaker 2: And as Wendy's mentioned that, you know, it's only the
Speaker 2: third day back in office for most of their teams,
Speaker 2: So I think understandable that we don't yet any kind
Speaker 2: of formal response from them, but we will continue to
Speaker 2: keep you posted and updated on this subject certainly continues
Speaker 2: to be a major consumer talking point. The other thing
Speaker 2: we're going to look at today is one that I
Speaker 2: think is very pertinent for this time of year, because
Speaker 2: it strikes me that a lot of people might have
Speaker 2: been lucky enough to receive a gift voucher as a
Speaker 2: Christmas gift. And I'm thinking of the teachers who are
Speaker 2: often given a gift voucher by the class at the
Speaker 2: end of the term and that sort of thing. They're
Speaker 2: probably quite a few new ones floating around in the
Speaker 2: system right now, which makes it a very good time
Speaker 2: to be talking about gift vouchers and some of the
Speaker 2: pitfalls that come with them. So, if you were lucky
Speaker 2: enough to be given a gift lutchuer of any sort
Speaker 2: over the first of season, I want to upfront make
Speaker 2: two suggestions.
Speaker 1: Firstly, go and put.
Speaker 2: It somewhere safe right now, in somewere where well you
Speaker 2: remember you have stashed it, whether that is in a
Speaker 2: particular file or in a safe or whatever it may be,
Speaker 2: put it in that place right away. And then secondly,
Speaker 2: go to your diary whether it's an electronic one or
Speaker 2: an old fashioned fire effects like I still use, and
Speaker 2: make a note of the expiry date so that you
Speaker 2: can be sure to remember to unlock the value.
Speaker 1: Of that gift voucher before it disappears.
Speaker 2: Wendy, won't you explain what made you want to talk.
Speaker 1: About the subject today?
Speaker 3: Okay?
Speaker 4: First of all, I want to say, also take a
Speaker 4: photograph of whether it's a card or a taper varcher.
Speaker 3: Or whatever it is.
Speaker 4: And it's because by law consumer protection acts, these vouchers
Speaker 4: prepaid vouchers, as distinct from vouchers that you get as
Speaker 4: part of a loyalty scheme that you haven't specifically directly
Speaker 4: paid for.
Speaker 3: So we're talking about prepaid, mostly gift type vouchers. They
Speaker 3: are valid for three years. The original bill wanted to
Speaker 3: make them valid for five years.
Speaker 4: And industrially at a cadet end, so they've made it
Speaker 4: three years. Three years, which is quite a long time.
Speaker 4: But many people myself included, for whatever reason. Now and
Speaker 4: then you don't have I didn't redeem a foot spa thing,
Speaker 4: which is my best but I just didn't just.
Speaker 3: Didn't get that. It's terrible because.
Speaker 4: My relative of mine paid for it and so, but
Speaker 4: it happens, so you can't. You don't have any recourse
Speaker 4: if you don't redeem the varcher within three years. The
Speaker 4: company gets to keep your money, no questions asked, as
Speaker 4: someone said to be once, but my money didn't expire
Speaker 4: in their bank account anyway.
Speaker 3: That's the way it is legally.
Speaker 4: Now today's scenario is what if that gift archer gets lost.
Speaker 4: Now the old days, all gift fartrees with paper, right,
Speaker 4: and if you lost it, it was the same as
Speaker 4: cash because you know, sorry if somebody asked, exactly sorry
Speaker 4: for you. But nowadays the big malls, the brands within
Speaker 4: them issue it's all electronically captured.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 4: So I had a situation just before Christmas in fact
Speaker 4: where Ashland weekly resident of KDDN but she was in
Speaker 4: the Eastern Cape, so she bought her a vouch of
Speaker 4: sixteen hundred grand as a gift from at home part
Speaker 4: of the TFG group in late November, shortly before Christmas.
Speaker 4: She was unable to find it. It was a card,
Speaker 4: so she asked her urban based mother Veena to take
Speaker 4: up the issue at the store in om Shlanga, which
Speaker 4: she did and the store staff got a hold of
Speaker 4: head office and they, I think through her ID number
Speaker 4: must have been They traced the card and they confirmed
Speaker 4: the value and they could also confirm that nobody had
Speaker 4: redeemed it in fullaw and part. So what did they do?
Speaker 4: They canceled it because it's now lost and she was
Speaker 4: told long story short, that another one would be reissued.
Speaker 3: But shortly before.
Speaker 4: Christmas, the mum got a called from the store to
Speaker 4: say they couldn't replace it after all, because a gift
Speaker 4: card is treated in the same way as cash.
Speaker 3: You lose it, you lose it, you lose the value.
Speaker 4: But her point to me, Pepper was and a very
Speaker 4: reasonable one. They know the voucher has not been used,
Speaker 4: They know because they canceled it, that it can never
Speaker 4: be used. So they sit in with the money oney
Speaker 4: six hundred rand and refusing to replace it, in other words,
Speaker 4: refusing to give either the buyer or the recipient the
Speaker 4: opportunity to redeem that money, so that sixteen hundred rand
Speaker 4: must now be regarded as forfeited. So I got hold
Speaker 4: of TFG and I said, are you really comfortable with
Speaker 4: retaining this money under the circumstances.
Speaker 3: And the circumstance that.
Speaker 4: Meant was you know, you.
Speaker 3: Originally acknowledged that was bought.
Speaker 4: You canceled it, and you said, we issue some other
Speaker 4: means of redeeming it, and then you change your mind.
Speaker 3: I mean, are you comfortable with that anyway?
Speaker 4: The response was to issue a gift card to the
Speaker 4: value of two thousand and so an extra four hundred
Speaker 4: grand as a gesture of goodwill and apology, and I
Speaker 4: was told as a general principle, gift cards are treated
Speaker 4: typically as cash equivalents and are therefore not ordinarily replaceable
Speaker 4: if lost or misplaced. That said, having viewed the specific
Speaker 4: circumstances of this case, including the earlier engagement with the store,
Speaker 4: we felt it appropriate to resolve the matter pragmatically and
Speaker 4: in the customer's favor.
Speaker 2: So they've replaced it with some extra sweetening spiggles on top,
Speaker 2: which seems to be a bit of a trend in
Speaker 2: the stories we're looking.
Speaker 1: At today, it does.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'd be interested to hear from any listeners
Speaker 2: who've had this experience of losing a gift card and
Speaker 2: whether you tried to engage with a store and ask
Speaker 2: them whether they would replace it for you, whether their
Speaker 2: system could show whether it had been used or not
Speaker 2: whether you got anywhere, Because when, as you said, in
Speaker 2: the olden days, where it was a piece of paper gone,
Speaker 2: you had no proof of the fact that somebody else
Speaker 2: had not picked it up and spent it in the future,
Speaker 2: you know, so there was very little sort of leg
Speaker 2: room for you. But now days or the system able
Speaker 2: to confirm it cannot be used, and we can cancel
Speaker 2: it to ensure it can't be used again, it really
Speaker 2: becomes a harder decision to defend. So TFG didn't about
Speaker 2: face on this one. That's one group's position. What do
Speaker 2: you consumer oversight bodies think of the stance?
Speaker 4: Wendy Okay, So I contacted the Consumer Goods and Services
Speaker 4: umbut Lisa.
Speaker 3: Brati, as well as our.
Speaker 4: Friend of the show consumer attorney Tridy Brookman, and this
Speaker 4: was right at the beginning of the week, so thankfully
Speaker 4: they both responded, even though the umbut is on leave
Speaker 4: until next week. And he got back to me to say,
Speaker 4: if a supplier refuses to reissue a lost gift card
Speaker 4: by relying on its own teacencies, this does not automatically
Speaker 4: make the refusal unlawful or sorry, it doesn't make the
Speaker 4: refusal lawful. Yeah, he says under the Consumer Protection Act,
Speaker 4: money paid for a gift card remains the consumer's property
Speaker 4: until the supplier has actually supplied the goods or services.
Speaker 4: If the CA can be traced, confirmed as unredeemed, and
Speaker 4: then canceled, the supplier has suffered no loss and no
Speaker 4: performance has taken place. They've given you nothing in return
Speaker 4: for what you paid them. A term that allows the
Speaker 4: supplier to keep the money without providing value is likely
Speaker 4: unfair and unenforceable, and the consumer, in my view this
Speaker 4: is the umbert's view, is entitled to have the value
Speaker 4: reissued or credited, despite what the fine print says, not
Speaker 4: as a good will gesture, but as.
Speaker 1: A legal requirement.
Speaker 3: Because yes, because it so.
Speaker 4: I think the problem with I think that the Act
Speaker 4: could have gone further, but it is, what is it
Speaker 4: going on fourteen years old now, and there should be
Speaker 4: a very firm distinction between a paper, physical voucher with
Speaker 4: no electronic backing, you know that's the record, and an
Speaker 4: electronic one.
Speaker 3: So then as we do.
Speaker 4: I also chatted to you to Trudy and she agreed,
Speaker 4: and she raised an interesting aspect, and that is there
Speaker 4: are two consumers involved, both the giver and the receiver
Speaker 4: of the voucher, and so I thought it would be
Speaker 4: interesting to get her views in general on this issue
Speaker 4: and then how that give a receiver thing plays out,
Speaker 4: what significance it has. If Trudy is consumer attorney Trudy Brookman,
Speaker 4: who is with us on the line. Now, Happy new
Speaker 4: Year to you, Trudy, and lovely to have you on
Speaker 4: the show again.
Speaker 5: Thanks for the happy near t and Wendy Batta and
Speaker 5: to all of the listeners. It's still likeful to be
Speaker 5: back on the show.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 5: Can I thank and give us make a few general comments?
Speaker 5: I mean, I want to zoom in on the on
Speaker 5: this thing about the two consumers, so I think I
Speaker 5: need to So yeah, just then the at home perspective
Speaker 5: that a voucher is equivalent to cash, I understand where
Speaker 5: they get that. Section sixty three of the Consumer Protection
Speaker 5: Act says that the money that sits behind a voucher
Speaker 5: gift voucher that was paid by the giver of the
Speaker 5: voucher belongs to the bearer of that voucher. So I
Speaker 5: walk around in the street and I dropped my Willie's
Speaker 5: gift card and someone else picks it up and is
Speaker 5: able to spend it at Wully's, then Wilise is entitled
Speaker 5: to give them Woolise products in exchange whatever my balance
Speaker 5: was on that card. In that sense, it is similar
Speaker 5: to cash. But if it wasn't picked up by someone,
Speaker 5: but it's slipped in, I don't know, and it's in
Speaker 5: one of my old handbags or whatever, and I don't
Speaker 5: find it within the three year period and I realized,
Speaker 5: my word, I need to use it before it runs out.
Speaker 5: Then one can go back. And you're not relying the
Speaker 5: non section sixty three of the Consumer Protection Act. That
Speaker 5: on section sixty five, which says that a supplier such
Speaker 5: as at Home or anyone else who issues gift vouchers
Speaker 5: supply is required by the Act to account for consumers property.
Speaker 5: And it specifically says that the money that's that was
Speaker 5: paid for that gift voucher does not belong to the supplier,
Speaker 5: but rather it's the property of the consumer. And and
Speaker 5: based on that, you are entitled to then get your
Speaker 5: money black so you can you can obviously also arrange
Speaker 5: with the retailer to give you to blacklist the lost
Speaker 5: gift card and to reissue a new card to you
Speaker 5: and and use it as a gift voucher if you prefer,
Speaker 5: but you and also the card has lost either the
Speaker 5: and here here is where we have the two consumers.
Speaker 5: So we have the giver and we have the receiver
Speaker 5: of the gift farture right, and both of those are
Speaker 5: consumers as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. And to
Speaker 5: my mind that means that either of them can approach
Speaker 5: the shop and say, sorry, the card has been lost. Sorry,
Speaker 5: the voucher is missing in action. Can you check where
Speaker 5: it it has been redeemed. If it hasn't been redeemed,
Speaker 5: here's our proofs that we purchased that, And that would
Speaker 5: usually be with the giver, right, But obviously, as the receiver,
Speaker 5: you usually have a relationship with that givern and you
Speaker 5: can go back to them. And so can you give
Speaker 5: me the proof I've misloaded? I need to go back
Speaker 5: to the shop. I know, for example, that game has
Speaker 5: contract terms that say if you lose your voucher, you
Speaker 5: have no recourse that practically behind this scenes despite that,
Speaker 5: and that's probably an illegal provision in their contract terms
Speaker 5: for the vouchers. They do honor the vouchers if you
Speaker 5: come back and say, well, no, it's been lost, they
Speaker 5: check on their system, the blacklist the lost gift card
Speaker 5: and reissue a new one. Toe for Yeah, and it
Speaker 5: should be as simple as that. That's the only honest
Speaker 5: way to do it, and it's the only requirement, and
Speaker 5: it is a requirement of Section sixty five, which says
Speaker 5: that the money does not belong to the retailer, and
Speaker 5: that the retailer must handle it in a manner which
Speaker 5: is reasonably to be expected of a person who's responsible
Speaker 5: for managing another person's property. That means that they must
Speaker 5: be particularly careful, dilegent, and skillful in the treating of
Speaker 5: that money. So obviously you can't just appropriate it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Okay, less three years have past.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, again we outside that three year window, it's
Speaker 2: a different story. But Trudy, thank you. That's short and
Speaker 2: sweet and absolutely clear that the retailer does have a
Speaker 2: responsibility to act if you can prove that you purchased
Speaker 2: it and that it has not been used and the
Speaker 2: value has not been derived from that card, and you
Speaker 2: are still within that window within the expiry date, they
Speaker 2: are obliged in terms of the law to then assist
Speaker 2: you in blacklisting the original card and issuing a new
Speaker 2: one or refunding you as an alternative. Truty Brookman, consumer attorney,
Speaker 2: thank you so much for that.
Speaker 1: Join the conversation.
Speaker 2: Join the conversation.
Speaker 1: You're with Kate Talk.
Speaker 2: We're back with Wendy Noler joining us via zoom this
Speaker 2: afternoon for our Consumer Talk segment. And we were talking
Speaker 2: about vouchers before the break, and there are I see
Speaker 2: one or two WhatsApp starting to come through on that subject.
Speaker 2: But you also welcome to raise open line questions in
Speaker 2: the final twenty minutes of the show on other consumer issues.
Speaker 2: So before the break, Wendy Truty absolutely unequivocal there in
Speaker 2: what the law says about who maintains ownership of the
Speaker 2: value of the voucher until the point of the expiry date.
Speaker 2: After that, of course all bets are off. But very
Speaker 2: interesting to see that here that legally, really if you
Speaker 2: can prove the voucher has not been used, and they're
Speaker 2: in a position to be able to stop the original
Speaker 2: form being used if it's been lost, they have to reissue,
Speaker 2: reissue one, or refund you. Now here's an interesting one.
Speaker 2: And Naran asking about your right of return on vouchers,
Speaker 2: he says, I bought a gift card for my wife
Speaker 2: for Christmas from a SPA, but she wanted a perfume instead.
Speaker 2: I tried to return the voucher a few days later
Speaker 2: so that I could swap it and buy her what
Speaker 2: she actually wanted, but I was told it can't be refunded.
Speaker 1: What would the CPA say about that? Is this question?
Speaker 3: Yeah, No, that's that's that's fine.
Speaker 4: That's the that's the condition that you accept when you
Speaker 4: buy a voucher rather than cash. So you are entitled
Speaker 4: to redeem it for anything that they sell within three
Speaker 4: years of the date of issue.
Speaker 3: And that's that. And we've foken what.
Speaker 4: Happens about you know, if the money, if the voucher,
Speaker 4: the means to access that money.
Speaker 3: And spend that value.
Speaker 4: If they lose it, and that, you know, that's within
Speaker 4: their powers to confirm that, you know, it's there, it's
Speaker 4: been canceled, they have to reissue, but you can't demand
Speaker 4: that it'd be exchanged for cash. So that's something that
Speaker 4: you're going to have to live with, unfortunately.
Speaker 2: Okay, so arin I either find somebody else to gift
Speaker 2: it to, or use it yourself, or spoiler wife for
Speaker 2: the second gift and hopefully she can make use of it.
Speaker 2: I wonder what everybody thinks of Vangie's opinion. Vanjie says
Speaker 2: gift vouchers are one of the most distasteful gifts one
Speaker 2: can gift or receive. Having said that, if a beneficiary
Speaker 2: loses the voucher, it's clearly not appreciated. Vangie's view is
Speaker 2: that they should be discontinued. I'm going to disagree with that.
Speaker 2: I love being given a gift voucher, and it's often
Speaker 2: a very thoughtful thing to give to somebody who don't
Speaker 2: know very well, for example, or for teachers, for example,
Speaker 2: let them buy what they need or want.
Speaker 5: Ah.
Speaker 2: It's always lovely when the class, you know, all pat
Speaker 2: pitched in to buy a substantial gift archer as a
Speaker 2: teacher gift at the end of the year, rather than
Speaker 2: going home with thirty different boxes of chocolates or coffee
Speaker 2: marks or pairs of socks, as appreciated as those things are.
Speaker 2: I think it's lovely to give somebody a gift that
Speaker 2: they can spend as they want to.
Speaker 3: Wendy, what do you agree with you?
Speaker 4: I agree with you one hundred percent. I think there's
Speaker 4: definite place for them in retail. I think you know
Speaker 4: that the retailers do well out of them because of
Speaker 4: the non redemption of a certain percentage. I've never been
Speaker 4: able to know what that percentage is, because I would
Speaker 4: like to think it's fairly substantial, but I think it is.
Speaker 3: I mean, yeah, I we've just had Christmas. I mean,
Speaker 3: my daughter was with us. She works in the Eastern Cape,
Speaker 3: and a lot.
Speaker 4: Of the relatives weren't sure and knew that, you know,
Speaker 4: an hour away, she's got access to well with so
Speaker 4: that she loves to shop there, and so she was delighted.
Speaker 4: Were their all these marchers, and they were delighted that
Speaker 4: she was delighted. So I think, you know, definitely a
Speaker 4: pla for them.
Speaker 1: Okay, thanks for that.
Speaker 2: We're going to move on to another follow up on
Speaker 2: a subject that came up last year, and after that
Speaker 2: we'll move to some open line cause, Marilyn, I see
Speaker 2: your voice note and we'll get to that shortly. But
Speaker 2: a quick follow up conversation around Tiger Brands and the
Speaker 2: Albany Raps Wendy.
Speaker 1: Late last year.
Speaker 2: I mentioned this on air, and several listeners sent in
Speaker 2: sort of me too statements at the time. For those
Speaker 2: who don't know the backstory. Let me just quickly tell
Speaker 2: you what happened. Albany Bread Wheat Wraps were talking about this,
Speaker 2: the tortilla shaped wrap that you use for a chicken
Speaker 2: wrap for lunch, or make for kezadias and tortillas if
Speaker 2: you're cooking Mexican food, for example, And a little while ago,
Speaker 2: Albany relaunched the product in new packaging, a resealable pack
Speaker 2: and I thought, great, fantastic, convenient to keep them fresh.
Speaker 1: I had kids home for the holidays.
Speaker 2: They we had to be friends in and out of
Speaker 2: the house, and I thought, let me stock up, and
Speaker 2: I bought three packets, thinking this will be perfect to
Speaker 2: have for hungry young adults visiting, only to discover when
Speaker 2: I opened those packets that the wraps inside them were
Speaker 2: unusable because they were all stuck together like glue and
Speaker 2: try and separate them resulted in tearing them that they
Speaker 2: became unusable. We were able to salvage salvage a few
Speaker 2: pieces that went in the air fryer to make crisps,
Speaker 2: but basically most of.
Speaker 1: It went in the bin.
Speaker 2: And Wendy, when I wrote to Tiger Brand's asking for
Speaker 2: a refund, I shall we say a really lackluster response
Speaker 2: from the Consumer Service customer care line. And I have
Speaker 2: to say one thing first. I have to confess that
Speaker 2: this is partly my own fault, because when I looked
Speaker 2: back through the correspondence, I realized that I had transcribed
Speaker 2: two digits of my phone number incorrectly. So when they
Speaker 2: said they had been trying to reach me and SMS
Speaker 2: me a replacement Varcher, I had not been receiving that correspondence,
Speaker 2: and that was my fault.
Speaker 1: But the problem was bigger than that. The problem was I.
Speaker 2: Didn't want a replacement Varcher. I had specifically said to them,
Speaker 2: the product you've sold is not fit for purpose. My rights,
Speaker 2: in terms of the Consumer Protection Act are my choice
Speaker 2: of a replacement or a refund, and I would like
Speaker 2: a refund. And they kept on saying, no, we'll send
Speaker 2: you a voucher, and the value of the voucher they
Speaker 2: were promising kept getting bigger, and I was trying to
Speaker 2: send you, Wendy, I'm not trying to enrich myself off you.
Speaker 2: I don't need a five hundred ruand voucher to go
Speaker 2: and spend on Tiger Brand's goods. I would just like
Speaker 2: my money back for the product that I bought and
Speaker 2: you're legally supposed to pay me that and compel. I
Speaker 2: was just getting nowhere with that. So at that point
Speaker 2: you took it up because, as I've just said, it
Speaker 2: wasn't just me, Wendy, it was several other Cape Talk listeners.
Speaker 1: You'd had the same experience.
Speaker 4: Yes, And I funnily enough, when I went onto social
Speaker 4: media TikTok et cetera, there were thousand influences being paid
Speaker 4: to punt the new, the well the old wraps and
Speaker 4: new packaging and the great resealable thing. And then I
Speaker 4: went onto fair Facebook page this is Albany and under
Speaker 4: all the marketing messages were loads of users saying we
Speaker 4: won't buy these they stick together. So it clearly was
Speaker 4: a problem, and the issue for me was that they
Speaker 4: did not appear to be they being Tiger brands through
Speaker 4: via their Albany brand. They weren't acknowledging that there was
Speaker 4: any particular problem. That's like you know, they usual please
Speaker 4: DMS or please sorry to hear that, but not saying
Speaker 4: what they told me when I took up the case,
Speaker 4: which was that there was a quality issue as they
Speaker 4: called it, that had been identified by the company with
Speaker 4: the packaging the new receivable packaging of all three variants
Speaker 4: of those wraps white brown as well as golic and
Speaker 4: herb quote. It resulted in the wraps sticking to one
Speaker 4: another and causing breakage when pulled apart. That so called
Speaker 4: small batch was produced in the five weeks between the
Speaker 4: fifteenth of October and the twenty third of November. I
Speaker 4: didn't know small that could be because this is a
Speaker 4: really proper popular product put out by a major brand.
Speaker 4: But anyway, they had been withdrawn from the shelves, he said.
Speaker 4: I didn't wasn't proven to win. But by the time
Speaker 4: that email was said sent to me, I think that
Speaker 4: would have been shortly before Christmas. Yes, they had been
Speaker 4: withdrawn from the shelves.
Speaker 3: Here's the interesting bit.
Speaker 4: Affected consumers can contact Tiger Brand's customer or consumer care
Speaker 4: line and they supplied it or an email address to
Speaker 4: receive a refund. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and
Speaker 4: reaffirm our commitment to providing safe, high quality products for
Speaker 4: our consumers.
Speaker 2: So that was the message you got from the media team,
Speaker 2: But Wendy obviously that didn't trickle down to their customer
Speaker 2: care team because as of a few days ago, they
Speaker 2: were still towing the line that said we will not
Speaker 2: issue a cash refund.
Speaker 1: We're going to send you a voucher.
Speaker 2: And I can actually see they've been trying to phone
Speaker 2: me while we've been on air, Wendy as see somebody
Speaker 2: has finally said to them listen. But I mean, this
Speaker 2: is the issue, the lack of the one hand not
Speaker 2: seeming to know what the other hand is doing. If
Speaker 2: the company his position is confirming that there's been a problem,
Speaker 2: that the product has been withdrawn, there's been no public
Speaker 2: statement to that effect, and I haven't seen any any
Speaker 2: sort of broad communication customers saying hey, we recognized there
Speaker 2: was an issue and if you've been affected, please get
Speaker 2: in touch.
Speaker 1: We will refund you.
Speaker 3: Exactly. So that is the problem, and a lot of
Speaker 3: companies do this. They just rather keep it quiet.
Speaker 4: If it being a safety issue, they would have been
Speaker 4: legally compelled to inform the National Consumer Commission that would
Speaker 4: have put out the recalls that we used to sharing
Speaker 4: with our audiences, you know, the way that they do it.
Speaker 4: But this wasn't a safety issue, and they were at
Speaker 4: pains to point that out in their response. You know,
Speaker 4: you could have there was no danger in eating them,
Speaker 4: and the shredded version of.
Speaker 2: The only dangerous to your laundry because the filling would
Speaker 2: fall out through the holes exactly.
Speaker 4: And you know it was just one big solid mass
Speaker 4: of these things, which is what which was not the
Speaker 4: intended way that they were supposed to that, that's not
Speaker 4: how they communicated and sold all individual wraps.
Speaker 3: So I.
Speaker 4: Went back to my contact to say, this has happened.
Speaker 4: Are they going to be what is the story?
Speaker 3: And I've got no.
Speaker 4: We've confirmed that customers are intitled to a refund if
Speaker 4: that is their choice. But I also asked what proof
Speaker 4: would be needed because bear in mind goes back a
Speaker 4: while now, so most people would have I don't know
Speaker 4: that that product could well they said they're withdrawn. But
Speaker 4: so in most cases people wouldn't have the till slip
Speaker 4: from picking as far from then, and it would have
Speaker 4: consumed and thrown away at the packaged in. In other words,
Speaker 4: have no proof of having bert purchased the product at all.
Speaker 4: So I said, how's that going to be handled? And
Speaker 4: I was told we'll get back to you. And I
Speaker 4: haven't had that response yet. But if it had been
Speaker 4: acknowledged and you know, apology given and said, look, if
Speaker 4: this happened to you, if you had to throw away
Speaker 4: or you know, land, you ended up with shredded bits
Speaker 4: of wrap and you couldn't use them in the way
Speaker 4: that you intended to, then this is what you should do. Yeah,
Speaker 4: here's how we're making amends. But to it kind of
Speaker 4: for it to have been sort of forced out of
Speaker 4: them BioMedia query.
Speaker 3: It's unfortunate. Yeah, yeah, later, much later was unfortunate.
Speaker 4: And I think, yeah, just yeah, I don't know our
Speaker 4: corporate I think they try and keep it in house
Speaker 4: as much as they can rather than public the acknowledging
Speaker 4: a fault.
Speaker 3: But it's you know, it's it's it's not a very
Speaker 3: wise or consumer friendly tactic.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I mean the reason we raise it again
Speaker 2: today is simply to let those of you who were
Speaker 2: also impacted. No, the company has acknowledged there was an
Speaker 2: issue with a batch. You do have the right to
Speaker 2: a refund and please do use that that option. You
Speaker 2: can raise their consumer care line on eight sixty one
Speaker 2: hundred eight nine one eight sixty one hundred eight nine
Speaker 2: to one, or send an email to Tiger CSD. That's
Speaker 2: Tiger CSD at Tiger Brands dot com and if you're
Speaker 2: driving and couldn't jot those details down, you're welcome to
Speaker 2: mail me after the show and I will pass them
Speaker 2: on to you. So please do contact them if you
Speaker 2: were one of the impacted customers and ask that they
Speaker 2: make good on the refund that is due to you.
Speaker 2: Appreciate that. Okay, Well, we're not alone in liking gift vouchers, Wendy.
Speaker 2: A few comments in from listeners, David saying gift rouchers
Speaker 2: are the absolute best gift ever. I love to give
Speaker 2: them and I really love to receive them as well.
Speaker 2: Linda and Claremont also loves them. Madeline says, I love
Speaker 2: a gift voucher like Walise that you can go and
Speaker 2: buy your choice of food, clothing, pots, whatever it is
Speaker 2: that you need and love. So they're a small sample,
Speaker 2: disagreeing with Vadjie who doesn't think they should continue to
Speaker 2: be used.
Speaker 1: Thanks for those.
Speaker 2: WhatsApps, And we've got about ten minutes in hand to
Speaker 2: take on a couple of open line calls, and we're
Speaker 2: going to start with a WhatsApp voice note that has
Speaker 2: come through from Marilyn. I believe a little bit earlier
Speaker 2: in the show, and this one links to a self
Speaker 2: and I think let's take.
Speaker 6: A listen, Papa, please, can you ask Wendy about the
Speaker 6: following scenario. My husband has an iPhone. He's had it
Speaker 6: for three months and something happened with the some part
Speaker 6: of it, and the I store said that they have
Speaker 6: the right to first repair it and then replace.
Speaker 1: Is that correct under consumer law?
Speaker 6: Thank you?
Speaker 2: They have no rights to assess it first, Wendy, if
Speaker 2: I remember correctly, yeah, But to demand to repair.
Speaker 3: No. And the celt phone industry is this kind of
Speaker 3: thing is quite widespread.
Speaker 4: I don't know how they get away with it. They're
Speaker 4: not in a separate category of good. That good that
Speaker 4: the CPA has carved out and said, this doesn't apply
Speaker 4: to you.
Speaker 3: If whatever you've bought, new.
Speaker 4: Or used does not perform without defect for at least
Speaker 4: six months within that time, you are entitled to return
Speaker 4: it for your choice of a refund, replacement, or repair.
Speaker 4: Obviously this case, repair is probably not relevant. But you
Speaker 4: know a lot of them will say, oh, you have
Speaker 4: to have return within the first month. It drives me
Speaker 4: up the wall. No pushback, push back hard, and let
Speaker 4: us know if they still won't allow you to have
Speaker 4: the remedy that you choose of those three and yes,
Speaker 4: thanks for mentioning it. This assessment period is a problem,
Speaker 4: and that it's not specifically it's implied, it's not specifically mentioned.
Speaker 3: In the Act, and it causes a lot of problems
Speaker 3: because people.
Speaker 4: Go in if they want a refund or they want
Speaker 4: a replacement, they want it then and there, especially with
Speaker 4: something as vital as a sulfone that you're using all
Speaker 4: the time, is central to the operation of your whole life.
Speaker 3: And then when the.
Speaker 4: Company says no, we're going to send this all for assessment,
Speaker 4: often it's not communicated fully and the person just hears no,
Speaker 4: you're not getting a refund or a replacement. What it
Speaker 4: means is you're not getting it now. But it's particularly
Speaker 4: with electronic goods. The supplier or the retailers a right
Speaker 4: to send or for a technical assessment to rule out
Speaker 4: user abuse. And there are cases of use abuse, so
Speaker 4: you cause the problem wasn't an inherent defect, so the
Speaker 4: CPI doesn't apply. So that unfortunately, there's no mention of
Speaker 4: that assessment period in the Act, although it's supported obviously
Speaker 4: by the Commission, Consumer Commission and the UMBUD and there's
Speaker 4: certainly no mention then of how long that assessment period
Speaker 4: can be because during that period the consumers being prejudiced.
Speaker 3: So I've raised this in the past.
Speaker 4: The OMBUD says between ten and fifteen days. Is between
Speaker 4: eight and ten days is fair because we're talking a
Speaker 4: week and a half and that should be days, not
Speaker 4: business days. That sneaky little business word added in there,
Speaker 4: which gives them so much more time.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but to say that they reserve there the what
Speaker 3: did they say they could repair, attempt to repair?
Speaker 5: It?
Speaker 2: Is their right to repair before replacing. That's It's simply
Speaker 2: not since Marilyn, it's simply nonsense.
Speaker 3: Month seven, yes, but not in the first six months.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so you absolutely have the right to go back
Speaker 2: to that store and demand that they replace it. Is
Speaker 2: your choice as the consumer to exercise that right. Thanks
Speaker 2: for for clarifying that, Wendy. Okay seven two five six
Speaker 2: seven one five six seven. If you'd like to raise
Speaker 2: an open line query or comment, and I've got a
Speaker 2: lovely comment I do. I'm glad we've got time to
Speaker 2: squeeze this in, Wendy, because it's it's the subject on
Speaker 2: which we get so much negative coverage I'm happy to
Speaker 2: hear a positive and it was a message that came
Speaker 2: in yesterday from Jillian. Further to our conversations about travel
Speaker 2: insurance late last year. I'm sure many listeners were with
Speaker 2: us that day when we did the show on how
Speaker 2: important it is to read the fine print of your
Speaker 2: travel insurance contract and to alert yourself to the possible
Speaker 2: exclusions that might come into play that you didn't spot.
Speaker 2: We had a couple of case studies that day where
Speaker 2: listeners had learned that the very hard way, and in
Speaker 2: some cases had fought back. But I thought really reassuring
Speaker 2: to get this statement from Jillian, who had a very
Speaker 2: positive travel insurance experience. She wrote in to say she
Speaker 2: had suffer at a very bad fall while she was
Speaker 2: traveling in Corfu, Greece, and she says, I want to
Speaker 2: thank Bright Insurance for how they handled everything. I was
Speaker 2: medivacked with a nurse, picked up by an ambulance on
Speaker 2: arrival that caped on international airport and taken straight to hospital. Wow,
Speaker 2: fab service, all covered. Thank you so much, Bright.
Speaker 1: She says.
Speaker 2: I'm happy to report I'm now walking again and well recovered.
Speaker 2: And Gillian, we're so glad to hear that you're back
Speaker 2: on your feet. But that's that's really great, Wendy. It's
Speaker 2: nice to hear that sometimes it does work and there's
Speaker 2: no qui quibbling. The claim is placed, the claim is paid,
Speaker 2: everything works as it's meant to, and that is what
Speaker 2: you want when you have a kind of crisis like
Speaker 2: this far from home.
Speaker 3: That's exactly why you choose to swend that money.
Speaker 4: And I think it's also a good opportunity for us
Speaker 4: to say that in most cases, I think these claims
Speaker 4: do go smoothly and you know, the company, the person
Speaker 4: that's paid that premium, which can be quite steep, especially
Speaker 4: if you're going to be away for you know, a
Speaker 4: number of weeks. They there for them when the bad
Speaker 4: thing that we hope doesn't happen does happen. So it's
Speaker 4: just that we don't often hear from people when it's
Speaker 4: all gone so well. So thank you to Jillian and
Speaker 4: to invite listeners for you know, reasons of Balance.
Speaker 3: At the end of the show, we got a few minutes.
Speaker 3: It would be.
Speaker 4: Lovely to share other experiences with claims on your home
Speaker 4: insurance policy.
Speaker 3: You know, the wall that collapsed, that it was paid
Speaker 3: out and you've got.
Speaker 4: The security guard until until it was reconstructed or whatever
Speaker 4: the case may be. I would love to be able
Speaker 4: to share those as we get them.
Speaker 1: Those positive cast balance and also to.
Speaker 4: Show ideally, this is how it should happen when we
Speaker 4: are highlighting the cases where consumers were let down.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, because there is also I think it's good
Speaker 2: to be reminded that is how it's meant to work,
Speaker 2: and we sometimes fall into a sort of a sense
Speaker 2: of complacency.
Speaker 1: Oh it's not Africa.
Speaker 2: Nothing works as it's meant to you, and you kind
Speaker 2: of almost start accepting that that's the normal and it's
Speaker 2: not meant to be. So I think it's it's a
Speaker 2: really good exact ample to share.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, wonderful, So grateful for it.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Thanks Jillian.
Speaker 2: And listen, while we're giving travel related praise, I'm going
Speaker 2: to utter the words I never thought I would hear
Speaker 2: myself say, what a famuless experience I had it a
Speaker 2: visa application appointment this morning, wownie. I mean, how many
Speaker 2: times have we spoken about the dramas and the difficulties
Speaker 2: and the struggles with those visa applications, you know, and
Speaker 2: normally just the mere thought of going to one of
Speaker 2: those appointments gives you goosebumps and fear because they are
Speaker 2: so stern and so stressful, and so unfriendly and unhelpful
Speaker 2: has been my previous experience.
Speaker 1: And I arrived this morning at Carprgo's.
Speaker 2: Offices in town, and all I can say is give
Speaker 2: an employee of the Month award and a medal and
Speaker 2: hopefully a bonus to Nita who works at your office
Speaker 2: in the towers, because what a wonderful experience, professional friendly.
Speaker 1: It made it feel for me wendy.
Speaker 2: In fact, I walked out of there thinking I feel
Speaker 2: excited that this trip is coming up and this is
Speaker 2: the beginning of my adventure, rather than walking out feeling
Speaker 2: sick to my stomach with worry. Did I have what
Speaker 2: I needed? It just was such a one hundred and
Speaker 2: eighty degree change of experience from what I've been used to.
Speaker 2: So I don't know whether the ongoing public attention and
Speaker 2: criticism of how awful the visa experiences can be is
Speaker 2: finally starting to trickle into some change on the ground,
Speaker 2: but certainly a very, very different and very positively different
Speaker 2: kind of experience for me at Carpago this morning. So
Speaker 2: and Anita I singled out because she was fantastic, but
Speaker 2: actually everything about the experience, from the instructions I received
Speaker 2: before arriving to the parking attendance to help navigating a
Speaker 2: quite complicated lift system, just everything worked and was friendly
Speaker 2: and efficient and big, big thumbs up to them.
Speaker 4: So yeah, I think that's fascinating. I'm just briefly, I'm
Speaker 4: I'm absolutely obsessed with cultures, cultures and companies and divisions
Speaker 4: within companies and all the rest. So the culture there
Speaker 4: is obviously one of extreme consumer focus and experiencing them
Speaker 4: in issues of the consumer and their journey, navigating that
Speaker 4: process and the decision too. We are going to make
Speaker 4: this as painless and as freely as possible. So if
Speaker 4: only that could be the default culture in all visa services,
Speaker 4: that would be a huge boon for would be traveling.
Speaker 1: Absolutely so well done, Capago at the Town has in
Speaker 1: Cape Town.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Last thing I want to say Claire who
Speaker 2: has sent us a message about the issue with the
Speaker 2: point Jim in Cape Town. Firstly, please go to the
Speaker 2: podcast page and look back for the show we did
Speaker 2: on this topic late last year. It'll be under the
Speaker 2: Wendy Nola Podcasts on Primedia plus dot com. But I've
Speaker 2: also forwarded your particular complaint back to Wendy because Wendy,
Speaker 2: we have promised to continue following up on this subject
Speaker 2: of the gyms that have been changed into the sort
Speaker 2: of premium lux version and what is happening to the
Speaker 2: customers who can't afford the premium lux premiums. And Claire
Speaker 2: is making some interesting comments about the pressure that is
Speaker 2: now being placed on other branches. So Claire, we have
Speaker 2: been waiting for Virgin Active to get back to us
Speaker 2: in the new year, once their media officers reopen. We
Speaker 2: will add your comments to the engagement that is ongoing.
Speaker 1: So thank you for that.
Speaker 2: I'm not ignoring your message, It's simply that it's part
Speaker 2: of a wider follow up conversation that we are busy
Speaker 2: working on. So please rest assured your message has been
Speaker 2: received and I have forwarded it on to Wendy to
Speaker 2: include with the whole bundle of similar complaints that we're
Speaker 2: dealing with. So to be continued, Wendy. To be continued
Speaker 2: in studio next week Wednesday when we have you back again.
Speaker 2: But enjoy the rest of your holiday break in the meantime,
Speaker 2: and thanks as always for everything you do for our listeners.
Speaker 3: Thanks so much, PAPERL See you next week.
Speaker 2: Yeah, keep well until then please, Wendy Nolan reminder you
Speaker 2: can always reach her via her website.
Speaker 1: Wendynola dot co dot ZEDA. The surname spelled know l
Speaker 1: e er