Mazda, ACCC both appeal the decision of the Federal Court
The The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is appealing a decision from Federal Court of Australiahad found Mazda did not engage in unscrupulous behavior when dealing with many unhappy customers.
Mazda Australia has also filed an appeal against its own ruling.
Although the Court rejected the ACCC’s allegations of unconscionable conduct in ruling in November 2021Mazda has detected misleading and deceptive conduct and made false or misleading statements.
“In addition to finding that Mazda misrepresented or misrepresented, the Court also found that Mazda allowed consumers to ‘run away’ by engaging in evasive and degrading practices, offers intimidating customer service and doesn’t make any real effort to review and adopt consumers. ensure the provisions of the Australian Consumer Law,” said ACCC Commissioner Liza Carver.
“We would argue that based on the Court’s factual findings, Mazda’s conduct fell below applicable standards of commercial conduct and was in any case unconscionable.”
Mazda Australia has also appealed the finding, dismissing claims of misleading conduct.
“Mazda has also filed an appeal seeking various findings of misleading conduct against it. Mazda asserts that the trial judge was correct in finding that Mazda did not engage in any unscrupulous conduct,” it said in a statement.
In its November 2021 ruling, Justice O’Callaghan found Mazda’s conduct to demonstrate “dreadful customer service” but denied the ACCC’s allegation of unscrupulous conduct.
“The fact that Mazda has not always provided consumers with exactly what they are looking for is not unconscionable conduct,” Federal Court Judge O’Callaghan said in the ruling.
Court found the company misrepresented or misrepresented 49 individuals about consumer rights to customers seeking refunds Mazda 2, 6, CX-3, CX-5and BT-50 vehicle failure occurs again.
The case involved seven vehicles and nine separate customers.
One customer had the engine replaced three times, but continued to have problems with their vehicle.
The ACCC alleges consumers are forced to contact Mazda repeatedly over months and even years, because they repeatedly experience problems with their vehicles, from faulty headlights to sudden loss of engine power.
It is alleged that, between 2017 and 2019, each customer requested a refund or a replacement vehicle within a year or two of purchase. The ACCC initiated proceedings against Mazda in October 2019.
Federal Court Judge O’Callaghan found Mazda, on behalf of customers it was only entitled to repair, offered to refund only a portion of the original purchase price or provide a replacement vehicle to the customer, provided they had to pay them.
“The court found that Mazda misled these consumers about their right to insure consumers by claiming that they were only entitled to repair their own vehicles, despite the consumer’s rights under the Consumer Law. Australian consumers also include refunds or replacements in the event of major damage,” the ACCC said in a statement.
“Mazda failed to comply with its own compliance policies in dealing with consumer complaints and sought to discourage consumers from pursuing their right to a refund or to purchase a replacement vehicle,” Ms. Carver alleges.
The court has yet to issue a penalty for Mazda Australia. However, previous lawsuits brought by the ACCC have resulted in court-enforceable undertakings from Volkswagen, Holden and Hyundai designed to improve compliance with Australian Consumer Law.
THAN: ACCC brought Honda Australia to court
THAN: Toyota Australia faces payouts as Federal Court finds faulty DPFs
THAN: NSW senator says Mercedes-Benz lied to Senate about agency switch
THAN: FCAI director said: ‘The 70s are gone’: Auto dealers must prepare to grow