New Zealand Law Society - Commission actions results in two court appearances

Commission actions results in two court appearances

This article is over 3 years old. More recent information on this subject may exist.

Action by the Commerce Commission has resulted in two separate court appearances.

Budge Collection Ltd and Sun Dong Kim

Rotorua business Budge Collection Ltd and sole director Sun Dong Kim have been convicted and fined a total of $71,250 in Auckland District Court after each pleaded guilty to four charges of misrepresenting how much alpaca fibre was in their duvets.

The Commission says Budge imported duvets from China and sold them to two Auckland retailers that largely cater for the tourist shopping market.

Mr Kim and Budge admitted to falsely claiming the alpaca wool duvets contained predominantly pure alpaca wool. The claims were made on labelling, packaging and on invoices to two retailers.

Three of the Budge duvets which the Commission had tested contained less than 4% alpaca fibre.

The Commission reports that in sentencing Judge Rob Ronayne acknowledged that Parliament had increased penalties under the Fair Trading Act threefold, and that a "substantial increase" in penalty levels was required to reflect Parliament's intention to denounce and deter these breaches of the law.

Zee Shop Ltd

Mobile trader Zee Shop Ltd has appeared in Auckland District Court in relation to 15 charges brought by the Commission relating to its lending practices.

The Commission says the charges against the Auckland-based truck shop are brought under the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 and relate to contracts entered into between 6 June 2015 and 31 December 2015.

It alleges that Zee Shop failed to provide its customers with the legally required key information relating to their loans. This included failing to state: the amount of each payment, when the first payment under the contract was due, and the frequency with which debtors would be required to make payments.

The Commission also alleges that information contained in Zee Shop's contract document was difficult to read and understand, and key information was obscured. 

"The terms and conditions were in two condensed columns with no headings, in a poor layout and format and with grammar that made some of the clauses incomprehensible," it says.