The following appears on theaustrailian.com.au
The court found that HP gave clients misleading advice on their consumer guarantee rights.
HP told customers that products purchased online could only be returned to the company at its sole discretion, which was also how it determined product remedies.
Consumers were also told that they were required to have their product repaired multiple times before being entitled to a replacement.
Another false claim was that the warranty period for HP products was limited to a specified express warranty period.
The court’s decision follows the settlement by HP and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission which instituted proceedings against the IT giant on October 16.
The court found that the company had refused to indemnify retail partners which failed to obtain authorisation from HP before giving a consumer a refund or replacement.
The court also ordered HP to make a $200,000 contribution towards the ACCC’s costs and establish a consumer redress process for affected customers, among others.
Under consumer laws, consumers have a right to a replacement or refund from the supplier if goods purchased on or after January 1, 2011 develop a major fault.
For minor faults, the customer can have it fixed at the supplier’s discretion but within a reasonable time failing which the goods can be rejected or a refund provided.
Federal Court Justice Robert Buchanan said the penalty was appropriate and “reflects an acknowledgment of the seriousness of the respondent’s conduct”.
According to an ACCC statement, Justice Buchannan noted the court’s disapproval of HP’s conduct and the need for general and specific deterrence for such behaviour.
ACCC chairman Rod Sims said it was an important case to the ACCC.
“The misconduct was widespread and systemic from a very large multinational firm.
“The ACCC believes that this penalty sends a strong message to all companies, particularly large multi-national companies, that the Australian Consumer Law is not negotiable. This result also shows that the court is not afraid to impose significant penalties for serious contraventions of the ACL,” Mr Sims said.
“All businesses operating in Australia require robust mechanisms to comply with the consumer guarantees provisions under the Australian Consumer Law,” he said.
A contrite HP said it had voluntarily consented to the court orders and was committed to reviewing its warranty and support practices in accordance with consumer laws.
“Individual, corporate and government customer satisfaction is the cornerstone of HP’s business,” a company spokeswoman said.
“We deeply regret that in the instances identified by the ACCC, HP fell short of our core commitment to high standards of service for consumers who purchased our HP-branded desktop computers, notebooks/laptops and printers and of our duties under Australian consumer laws.”
HP vowed to “provide customer support to assist consumers in resolving concerns with HP products in accordance with the Australian Consumer Law”.
It has established a specific consumer redress program — involving a customer contact centre — to tackle concerns related to HP-branded desktop computers, notebooks/laptops and printers.
Click here to read the rest of the article at theaustrailian.com.au