:-: Australian Court fined AirAsia A$200,000 for misleading advertisements :-:
Thank you YB Datuk Ismail Sabri, the MInister of
Trade, Co-operatives and Consumerism, for taking immediate actions to
stop AirAsia from putting up more misleading advertisements in The Star.
Hence, we saw the sudden change of the AirAsia’s promotional period to
31 March 2013 as could be seen from the above.
Despite the fact that the Malaysian Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) granted an Air Operation Certificate (AOC) until 31 March 2013 for failure to comply with safety regulation but AirAsia saw it fit to promote selling of its tickets until 31 December 2013. Please read in HERE and HERE.
Below were the AirAsis’s advertisements:
Just look at all the above advertisements with the word “FREE” . How many really got the so-called bargain for “FREE”?
Luckily AirAsia did not publish the same advertisment (promoting the
sale of tickets after 31 March 2013) in Australia otherwise it will face
a fine more than A$200,000. On 18 December 2012, the Herald Sun of Melbourne
has published the decision of the Federal Court in Melbourne where
AirAsia was fined A$200,000 for putting up misleading advertisement.
Yours truly would like to thank one of the readers for the alert of the
news from Herald Sun in Melbourne.
Below is the full report:
Herald Sun Melbourne 18 December 2012
LOW-cost carrier Air Asia has been given a hefty fine for not including taxes and other charges on its website.
The Malaysian airline was fined $200,000 in the Federal Court in Melbourne today for contravening the single pricing provision of the Australian Consumer Law.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said the case followed a ten month period during which the www.airasia.com website
did not display some airfare prices inclusive of all taxes, duties,
fees and other mandatory charges “in a prominent way and as a single
figure”.
The fine related to flights between Melbourne and Macau, London, Ho Chi Minh City, New Delhi, Hangzhou and Chengdu as well as from Perth to Taipei, Phuket, Osaka, London, Ho Chi Minh City and Hangzhou and from the Gold Coast to Ho Chi Minh City.
Justice Tracey said unless the full price is prominently displayed
the consumer may well be attracted to a transaction which he or she
would not otherwise have found to be appealing and grudgingly pay the
additional imposts rather than go to the trouble of withdrawing from the
transaction and looking elsewhere.
He said the company will also obtain an advantage over competitors who are compliant.
He accepted a court undertaking from Air Asia Berhad restraining it from engaging in similar conduct for three years.
“This ACCC action vindicates the importance of all inclusive pricing,” ACCC chairman Rod Sims said.
“Consumers must have accurate price information, and in turn,
airlines require a level playing field on price representations in this
competitive industry where consumers are price sensitive.”
Comments
Post a Comment