Darwin telco faces regulator over network coverage

 

EDirect faces Federal Court for the third time.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) this week instituted its third Federal Court case against Darwin telco EDirect for misleading conduct.

EDirect, which traded as VIPtel Mobile, was to face court on 17 May for entering into mobile phone contracts with consumers who provided addresses in areas with no network coverage.

Those contracts were allegedly struck by telemarketers. According to the ACCC, EDirect engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by implying that the services would work in those areas.

The regulator sought pecuniary penalties, injunctions, declarations, redress for affected consumers and court costs.

This week’s case came despite a February 2008 ruling that EDirect breached the Trades Practices Act for selling 24-month contracts to remote, unserviceable communities.

At the time, Federal Court Justice John Edward Reeves ordered EDirect to pay costs of $50,000 to the ACCC, refund more than 150 customers, and not to engage in the conduct again.

EDirect’s second legal dispute with the ACCC reached the Federal Court last August, and was yet to conclude.

The ACCC claimed last August that EDirect had made misleading representations to customers that a friend or family member “loved the calling plan” they had been offered by VIPtel, and that the customer had pre-approved credit and could therefore afford the contract on offer.

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Darwin telco faces regulator over network coverage
 
 
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australian miners send drones to work
In-depth: Unmanned aerial vehicles in the resources sector.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  19%
 
No
  81%
TOTAL VOTES: 510

Vote