Rewards and punishments

Last week I gave our dear friends at Botswana Power Corporation an idea that I thought might help them to confront some of the problems they face. No, I’m not talking about dealing with the perception amongst the public that they are a disaster as a provider of power. No, I’m not talking about improving the experience I’m sure most of us have had of calling their so-called “Faults” number only to hear it ring until you lose the will to live. No, I’m not talking about confronting the feeling most of us have that they should get off their parastatal backsides and DO something about our power crisis.

On the contrary, I’m talking about the future, about preventing this sort of problem from happening again. Regardless of the construction of new power stations, making new and better deals with neighboring countries and buying power production from the private sector I suspect we are always going to have power problems in Botswana. That’s because we’re wasteful. Given the opportunity to have all our lights on 24/7, to run our pool pump when it’s already crystal clear and to have every air-con in the building running all the time, that’s what we do. We are just a wasteful nation.

Knowing I run the risk of causing offence by saying this, it’s not our only failing. We can’t take our drink and we can’t drive properly either. Much as I find the alcohol levy irritating it does seem from the evidence elsewhere that pricing is the only effective way to curb drinking. I suspect the same goes for driving as well. If we want to improve the quality of driving and to reduce the level of death and destruction on our roads we need to make bad driving an expensive business. Some months ago an acquaintance of mine complained that he had been stopped by the police for driving while speaking on his cellphone. He was appalled at the fine he was made to pay. Another complained about being fined P1,000 for driving through a red robot. I don’t think either was impressed by my lack of sympathy. Forgive me for misquoting the old saying: If you can’t pay the fine, then don’t do the crime. The best way to avoid traffic fines is not to speed, not to run red lights and not to drive like a moron. Yes, I DO mean combi and taxi drivers, I also mean you. And me.

The sooner we’re genuinely afraid of breaking the rules the better. The sooner we’re afraid, the sooner we might actually obey the rules and save some lives.

I think the same goes for power consumption. The sooner it hurts us if we waste electricity the sooner we might actually stop and think about how much we’re using. The sooner they reward us for reducing our power consumption, the sooner we might actually do that.

The irony is that unlike recycling your refuse, cutting back on your alcohol abuse or controlling the speed at which you drive, saving power has no downside. Nobody is telling you not to watch TV, have a swim or cook dinner, they’re just suggesting that you’re a little bit more sensible about switching devices off.

My idea last week was for BPC to be able to punish and reward us depending on whether we use less or more power. I don’t just mean that our bills should go up and down in proportion to our consumption, I mean something extra. If your consumption goes down by 10% compared to the same period last year then obviously your bill goes down in proportion but I suggest they cut another 10% off as well as a reward. If your consumption goes up the same thing happens but in reverse. Your bill would go up in proportion to your increased use but they would then add a punishment factor on top.

It sounds cruel to the bigger and more profligate users but do we really care? They should have been more prudent. They should have thought about this before they plugged in all that equipment. They should have tried harder to save money.

But think also of the possible benefits. Just imagine what would happen if you halved your electricity consumption. Your bill would be zero. The 50% you actually used would be entirely free.

OK, perhaps you think this is all too radical? Giving consumers a financial incentive to reduce their costs would never work. Well, consider this. It’s working right now in the insurance industry. Many insurance companies offer a “no claims discount” to their customers. They offer their prudent customers a discount if they make no claims. The less often you make claims the less you pay. Those that have accidents and make claims aren’t given the discount.

So why can’t the rest of the business world work the same way? Why can’t banks offer you loans at cheaper rates if you paid off the last loan without a single problem? I don’t have any problem with making the bad payers, the wasteful and the reckless pay more than those who do their best to be good customers and neighbors.

If the business world can even consider these things why can’t the parastatals like BPC? Or is it that they still see themselves as somehow different from real businesses? Is it that they don’t think they should play by the same rules as the rest of us. Is it that they really don’t give a damn about their customers? Why don’t they prove me wrong?

This week’s stars

• Kwape from South African Express Airways for being so helpful, friendly and giving good advice!

The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Dear Consumer’s Voice #1

I opened a store account in 2005. I was retrenched in April 2010 and went into arrears. I tried to pay but a month later a friend told me that you I should have registered for their account protection plan. I checked my statements and realized that all these years I had been paying for this protection which covered me for death, disability and retrenchment.

I spoke to someone at their call center who acknowledged I was covered and asked me to send the details of my retrenchment. I did and they acknowledged that they got the information and they will get back to me once everything has been processed. I waited and months later was told there was no information about my retrenchment and they later took me to debt collector. I gave the debt collectors all the documents I had when I was communicating with the store. They even advised that they were experiencing the same problem with other customers and they didn’t contact me again.

Now the store say I filed the application too late. I tried to explain that I did this all long back and nobody helped. I even got a letter from a manager acknowledging that I am entitled to benefits. I’ve spoken to many people here and in SA but nobody can help me.

Now I don’t know where to start. They’ve told me that the plan only works if I request it within 3 months. I tried to explain that I faxed them two months after my retrenchment and even have proof that it went through but they refused. What can I do?

This is beyond a joke. You paid the Account Protection Plan for 5 years and you are entitled to make a claim and get paid. I checked and actually you had 120 days to submit a claim.

Send them a letter with copies of the documents about your retrenchment, the previous correspondence you received from them and demand that they sort out this mess. Send a copy to the branch where you originally opened the account and their South African Head Office. Make sure you tell them you’ve told us about it as well. We’ll also get in touch with them and politely encourage them to get a move on.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #2

I need your help in checking a school in South Africa. My friend is interested in attending it but I’ve been skeptical about it. For instance the longest course they offer runs for 20 days, while most are for just 10-15 days. They offer technical courses like rigging and welding at fees of up to R9,000 all of which must be paid up front and is non-refundable. Also they claim that no one can fail because they offer practical courses which doesn’t sound right because practical courses can be failed even if it were 100% practical and no theory.

You’re right to be suspicious. I’ve emailed them asking them about the courses you can’t fail and the fees up front. I also asked them about the claim on their web site that they’ve been operating since 1999 when they only registered as a company in 2009 but I haven’t heard from them yet. It’s all too suspicious.

World Business Guide – a warning

We’ve heard from several people in Botswana and elsewhere in the region who asked for advice about the World Business Guide. It’s simple. This online directory is a scam.

They invite you, usually by fax to your office, to enter your details into their directory, assuring you that “Updating is free of charge”. They rely on someone in your office filling in the details and returning the completed form without reading the small print. That’s where it says, in letters so small that often they can’t be read, that entering your details actually costs €995, over P5,000 per year. They’ll then send you an invoice and refuse to accept your explanation that it was all a mistake. They’ll threaten you with legal action until they get their money.

So should you pay up? Certainly not. This is no more than a scam. What’s more they have never actually taken legal action against anyone, simply because they know any magistrate or judge would just laugh at their claims. If you hear from them please just ignore them. Either that or sent them an extremely rude email. Remember that it’s perfectly acceptable to be rude to scammers!

Another free idea (this time for BPC)

Last week I gave away two free ideas to our friends, the decision-makers in Government. You can see them in full in last week’s Mmegi or on our blog site. The first was to abolish the Consumer Protection Unit, to devolve it’s powers to local authorities and councils and to make a formal link between consumer rights and trade licensing. Local authorities would have the right, perhaps even the obligation, to consider the level of complaints that had been made about a store, and how well they had been resolved, before renewing a store’s licence. They can already deny a store a licence on safety and hygiene grounds, why not also on how they treat their customers?

The second idea was to allow you and I to enforce our own rights. At the moment we have to rely on the Consumer Protection Unit to enforce their Regulations on our behalf. I want that to change. I want you and I to be able to drag a badly behaving store or supplier to Court ourselves and demand problems are fixed. I want us to go the rather wonderful Small Claims Court and ask them to order a store to remedy a breach of the Regulations. I don’t think this is too much to ask, do you? We’re grown ups, we are perfectly capable of reading the excellently written Regulations and understanding when our rights have been abused. We should be allowed by government to do some of these things ourselves.

So what about another free idea? Not for Government this time but for our most respected purveyor of electricity, the esteemed Botswana Power Corporation.

Before you continue, let me stress that this is NOT going to be a rant against BPC. Others have done that, there’s no point in me adding my complaints to the list. Instead I want to be positive, I want to be constructive and helpful.

At least part of the problem we’re facing with power is that we use too much of it. Yes, I DO mean you and me but I also mean stores, showrooms and factories. I mean company offices, government buildings and shopping centers. If we used less electricity the need for load-shedding would surely decrease. And here’s a novel idea: we’d save money.

But we all know this, don’t we? I’m not claiming the moral high ground, I know I’m just as wasteful as you are. But neither of us is as wasteful as the car showrooms that keep their lights on all night or the shopping centers who keep their advertising switched on all night.

So here’s the idea. Structured bill adjustments.

I think our electricity bills, and those of stores and companies, should have structured discounts and premiums applied to them depending on how our consumption has changed. I don’t just mean that lower consumption would mean lower bills, I mean more than that. I think BPC should apply additional discounts, or premiums, on top of the bill.

For instance, I’d like to see my January electricity bill have a statement at the bottom saying:

“Your consumption for January 2012 is 10% lower than in January 2011. We have therefore deducted an additional 10% from your bill.”

So I not only get a lower bill because I used less power but they reward me even further.

But, most importantly, it would work the other way as well. If you use 10% more power than last year then you pay an additional 10% as a punishment. So your bill goes up? I don’t care, you’ve used more power. You’ve either built another wing to your mansion, bought too many Play Stations or you’ve been careless, I really don’t give a damn, you deserve to subsidize those customers who have reduced their consumption. If you don’t want your bills to go up then cut your electricity usage as you construct your new luxury swimming pool.

Fancy an example? Let’s say your power bill last January was P500 and this month, because you’ve been power conscious, switched off your geyser and pool pump during the day and switched to lower power light bulbs, this January you use 10% less power. So already your bill would have dropped to P450, assuming energy prices are the same. But then BPC would knock another 10% off the P450 as a reward. Your final bill is now down to P405.

And if your consumption went UP by 10%? Then your new bill, including the power-hog penalty, would be a significantly higher at P605.

The advantage is that this genuinely rewards those of us who cut our consumption and help avoid load-shedding. It also puts the extra burden on those who deserve it, the ones who don’t even try.

Here’s a challenging thought for those of us, like me, who like a drink. The evidence, if you really want to face it, is that the only effective way to reduce alcohol consumption is to increase the price. Adding a duty onto the cost of booze is the only known, effective way, to make people cut down. So why is power any different? If we can do it for alcohol we can do it for electricity, but at least this way we can also reward those who do the right thing.

I’ve only one last suggestion. I don’t think this goes far enough. I think the discount or premium we get should be DOUBLE our change in consumption. Reduce your consumption by 10% and you get a 20% discount taking your P500 bill last year to a mere P360. Increase your usage by 10% and your bill will leap from P500 to P660.

Of course this will make some people unhappy but it will delight others. Which do you want to be? And what do BPC want to be? An organization we all despise or one that comes up with innovative and rewarding solutions for it’s customers?

This week’s stars

• Brian from Ellies for attentive service and good follow up.

The romantic scams continue...

We received an email from a woman who had posted her profile on a dating site and had 4 responses from what seemed like eligible men. All four of them turned out to be "romantic scammers". It's the usual story, they seduce the woman electronically with kind words, attention and pictures of hunky guys. Sooner or later they ask for money.

One has a Facebook profile which Facebook users can see here. He calls himself "Raymond Zachary" and shows pictures of himself in uniform and receiving a medal. In fact the medal picture is interesting. Here's the selection of pictures he proudly posts:

What a strange coincidence. Here's a picture from a story about a genuine US soldier, Staff Sgt. Zachary Rhyner, receiving an award. This is after he received "the Air Force Cross, the service’s highest distinction for valor except for the Medal of Honor. He becomes just the third airmen — the other two died in battle — to receive the honor since 2001 and only the 25th enlisted airman since enlisted airmen became eligible in 1960".

Forget the geopolitical situation right now, forget the reasons behind invasions, forget everything except that this is a very brave young man doing what he thought was good and remember that some horrible scammer has stolen his image to exploit women and steal their money.

In case you have a quiet moment with nothing better to do, you can email the scammer by clicking here. Make sure you say something VERY rude.

The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Dear Consumer’s Voice #1

I have a problem with a duvet cover I bought from a store at Riverwalk. Within 5 days of purchase and use it was torn at the bottom. I called the store to complain about the issue and ask either for an exchange or a refund. The lady at the store told me that they do not change or refund used items as stated on their receipt and they will not account for my carelessness as I did not take proper care of the cover.

This is unfair. I received the duvet cover as a Christmas gift from my colleague and he did not keep the receipt as he did not predict what could go wrong with the item. I have a price tag that bears the bar code, the price and the shop name.

I believe that I have the right as a consumer to return any item that is not in a satisfactory state to the supplier as soon as I found it faulty and I am entitled for an exchange or refund.

On the outer cover there is the following information: “If you are not entirely happy with this product please contact [store name]. If you wish to return this item please return original packaging and till slip and return within 60 days.

I don’t think this is good enough. A duvet cover is meant to last a lot longer than a few days, so long as you haven’t been doing anything too violent to it.

This situation is slightly different because I don’t think you’re entitled to a refund. That’s because you didn’t pay for it. However I DO think you’re entitled to a duvet cover that isn’t torn. You still have the packaging which clearly states the return policy, confirms which store sold it and I think it’s reasonable to explain that it was a gift and you don’t therefore have the original till receipt.

I suggest you go back to the store and explain that they have breached Section 13 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Regulations which say that a store has failed “to meet minimum standards and specifications” if they sell something that is not “of merchantable quality”. A duvet cover that tears within a couple of days clearly isn’t “fit for the purposes for which commodities of that kind are usually purchased”.

If they don’t do the right thing let us know.

Update: We've heard from the store and a replacement has been offered.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #2

I received a text message from a debt collector after I missed their calls. I returned their call this morning to find out what it was about. They informed me that they were instructed by my bank to collect outstanding credit card payments.

I was surprised because previously I was handed to another debt collector. I paid the full amount of over P8,000 which was demanded from me and the first debt collectors gave me a letter showing that indeed I have cleared my debt. Now I just learned this morning that I have been handed to the second company
and according to them I still have an outstanding amount of nearly P5,000.

What I want to know is shouldn't the bank have written me a letter to inform me of this balance?

This sounds like a mistake to me. It sounds like the first debt collection company has miscommunicated with your bank about the amount they collected from you. We’ll get in touch with the bank in question and see if they can investigate and resolve this matter for you.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #3

My sister went shopping at the recently opened Rail Park Mall and was injured in the shop by a step-ladder while shopping. She had a cut which was bleeding. She tells me she was given painkillers, some "first aid procedures" and P30 to get a cab home.

Is this all a reputable store can do? I’m limited in that area but think they should have done more than that.

I’m not a doctor but I suspect that a bit more than this is called for. I suspect that if she was cut by a metal object she might need a tetanus jab? She might also need an apology from the store for her injury and the rest of us need assurance that they’re not going to injure us as well. I think she should visit her doctor for advice and keep a receipt for anything he charges her. The store will need to pay for that.

Free ideas

It’s time for another Consumer Watchdog giveaway. This time it’s two free ideas for Government to consider. They’re not just random ideas, these are two suggestions based on many years of experience of consumer rights enforcement in Botswana (or the lack of it). I firmly believe that these ideas stand a chance of improving the welfare of consumers and might actually empower them. See what you think.

Idea Number 1. Abolish the Consumer Protection Unit and decentralize consumer rights enforcement.

This isn’t a dig at the Consumer Protection Unit although I do think they aren’t using their powers even nearly enough. I’m suggesting this because I genuinely believe this is a way for individual consumers to have better enforcement of their rights and is a better way of spending our money.

I think the Consumer Protection Unit within the Ministry of Trade and Industry should be shut down. In it’s place a new but much, much smaller Consumer Rights Research and Policy Unit should be established. Their job would be much simpler, their list of tasks much smaller. It would be to research consumer rights, to critically examine what other countries are doing, to see what works and what doesn’t and to draft ideas for Parliament to consider as new Laws and Regulations. They would set the rules and policies that others would follow. It would also be their job to supply educational materials to the Ministry of Education who would incorporate it into the school curriculum. They could do all that hard work attending major conferences, benchmarking and engaging with international stakeholders. We would only need a handful of people to do this.

So who would actually enforce consumer rights if the Consumer Protection Unit was abolished? That’s the adventurous bit. I think Local Authorities and Councils could enforce these rights much more effectively. They already inspect and licence businesses, they already say whether a store can trade or not, they already check to see if they have the right number of toilets and fire escapes. They are the ones who actually visit the stores and meet the managers. They are the ones who are best placed to say, based on the complaints they’ve received, whether a store respects consumer’s rights or not. They’re certainly in a better position to determine these things than a distant government office. They could only be more effective.

I think we should create new positions in Local Authorities and Councils. Call them Consumer Rights Officers. It would be their job to receive complaints and to investigate them, suggest resolutions and, critically, to make sure everything they do regarding a store is filed away for review next time the store’s licence is due for renewal. When the review occurs each year the Consumer Rights Officer would be required to report the number and nature of the complaints received and to comment on how well they had been resolved. If too many complaints have come in, or the store has failed to resolve enough of them, the Consumer Rights Officer’s job would be to veto the licence renewal.

Can you imagine how well customers would be treated if a store owner knew that their licence to trade wasn’t going to be renewed if they'd mistreated too many customers in the last few months?

I haven’t done the maths but I can’t imagine this would cost any more than the existing arrangements. Simply transfer the existing Consumer Protection staff to the councils. You could also drastically reduce the need to even threaten misbehaving stores with prosecution. The potential removal of their trade licence would be more than enough to make them behave themselves.

I like this idea because it makes consumer right enforcement a local issue. It even makes it a political issue. Imagine how exciting a local council election would be if consumer rights became a local issue.

Idea Number 2. Make the Consumer Protection Regulations personally enforceable.

Currently the only organization in Botswana that actually has the power to enforce the Consumer Protection Regulations is the Consumer Protection Unit. You and I can’t enforce them. This must change.

I want us all to have the right to take an organization to court for breaching the Regulations, without having to rely on any part of the Public Service to do it for us. I want you and I to be able to go to the Small Claims Court and explain that a store has breached a Section of the Regulations and to have them grant us an order to get the matter resolved. I don’t want to queue up and wait for anyone else to do it on my behalf. Like you, I’m a grown up who can look after myself if I’m given the opportunity to do so.

I think that the time has come for the people to be trusted by their Government. It’s time to treat us as mature, confident and educated grown-ups who want to look after themselves. As a parent I know it’s difficult to let your kids take more and more responsibility for their lives but you have to do it. The same goes for a democratic Government and it’s people. It’s about time we were trusted with our own welfare. Give us the weapons, like the excellent Small Claims Court, but let us use them ourselves, not via anonymous and bureaucratic organs of the Public Service.

I think that localizing the enforcement of consumer rights and giving the people the power to do a lot of this themselves might dramatically improve our lives. It might also make us feel a bit more grown up.

So what do you think? Honestly, what do you think? I want feedback. If I get enough constructive feedback I’ll send a copy of this article to the people with the power to actually make this all happen. Then we can see if they agree too that we’re grown-ups!

The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Dear Consumer’s Voice #1

I would really like your advice on the following matter. Two weeks ago I lay-byed a bag in a shop in Game City for P200. The following day my husband bought me the same bag from the same shop. I went back to the store and told them my story and asked if there was a way they could help me. The owner told me to look for another bag worth P200 but I couldn’t find one. She suggested that maybe I should look at the other items in the shop worth P200. She told me its not possible to give me a refund. I tried to plead with the woman who in turn just walked away and I was left with the shop attendants so I gave up.

I will really appreciate if you could advise me on this issue.

I’m sorry you’ve had this bad experience, particularly after your husband was so generous!

Technically of course the store hasn’t done anything wrong. It’s not their fault that this mistake happened. However they ARE being a bit mean in my view. My understanding is that you haven’t yet picked up the bag you lay-byed? If this is true it surely would cost them nothing at all to refund you the money you’ve paid so far. It would be really very inconsiderate and unfriendly of them not to give you your money back.

However if you have already picked up the lay-byed bag as well as the one your lovely husband got you the situation is different. Your bag is now second-hand and the store will suffer a loss if you return it because they can’t sell it as new any longer.

Let me know whether you have the lay-byed bag and we’ll see what we can do to assist.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #2

Hi I would like to know if Paynize is legitimate, I believe its a scam and please notify people about it.

Paynize.com is yet another web based “opportunity” to make money by visiting web sites. Before any techies complain that some web sites can make money by having lots of visitors, people should know that the amounts are incredibly small and there’s no way that people like you and me can make any money from the process. The arithmetic simply doesn’t work out. Just ask yourself why the owner of a web site would pay a total stranger to visit it? It doesn’t make sense.

In fact Paynize is one stage more irritating than that. Paynize require you to refer other people to the web sites they suggest. That’s how they claim you’ll make money (although you won’t). Their web site is clear when it says: “Registration is Free, you have to refer your friends and users via your referral link and complete tasks to earn.” How do you think your friends will react if you start bombarding them with pointless links?

As with any other get-rick-quick scheme I suggest you give it a miss and focus on real work instead.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #3

I received an email from DHL saying I had a delivery notification. The email had an attachment. I read your warnings about these things before, should I open it?

No, you certainly should NOT open any email attachment from people you don’t know. The attachment in the email you sent me contained a Trojan, a type of virus that remain on your computer perhaps allowing someone else to gain control of your computer and then getting up to all sorts of mischief.

The lesson is simple. Don’t trust emails form people you don’t know. Don’t trust emails from people you DO know if they contain unexpected attachments. Also, if you don’t have an up-to-date antivirus package on your computer then you are asking for trouble. Despite what some companies and PC manufacturers will tell you antivirus protection does not need to cost money.

Headway University - feedback

A reader's comment:

"I was approached by Headway after a failed attempt from another scam Uni--Corllins ,, maybe they just changed their name , I have had multiple emails and phone calls from just a 6 digit number , I live and work in China so after some discussion I said that I could send the special price of $499 via western union --OH NO you cant do that we don`t accept WU payments from China we only accept WU from the middle east , and you have to send the money there , I asked where and Ethan just stopped chatting, I also asked many times for their actual physical address --again no answer ,,thanks for the blog"

The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Dear Consumer’s Voice #1

I have a problem with a duvet cover I bought from a store at Riverwalk. Within 5 days of purchase and use it was torn at the bottom. I called the store to complain about the issue and ask either for an exchange or a refund. The lady at the store told me that they do not change or refund used items as stated on their receipt and they will not account for my carelessness as I did not take proper care of the cover.

This is unfair. I received the duvet cover as a Christmas gift from my colleague and he did not keep the receipt as he did not predict what could go wrong with the item. I have a price tag that bears the bar code, the price and the shop name.

I believe that I have the right as a consumer to return any item that is not in a satisfactory state to the supplier as soon as I found it faulty and I am entitled for an exchange or refund.

On the outer cover there is the following information: “If you are not entirely happy with this product please contact [store name]. If you wish to return this item please return original packaging and till slip and return within 60 days.

I don’t think this is good enough. A duvet cover is meant to last a lot longer than a few days, so long as you haven’t been doing anything too violent to it.

This situation is slightly different because I don’t think you’re entitled to a refund. That’s because you didn’t pay for it. However I DO think you’re entitled to a duvet cover that isn’t torn. You still have the packaging which clearly states the return policy, confirms which store sold it and I think it’s reasonable to explain that it was a gift and you don’t therefore have the original till receipt.

I suggest you go back to the store and explain that they have breached Section 13 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Regulations which say that a store has failed “to meet minimum standards and specifications” if they sell something that is not “of merchantable quality”. A duvet cover that tears within a couple of days clearly isn’t “fit for the purposes for which commodities of that kind are usually purchased”.

If they don’t do the right thing let us know.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #2

I received a text message from a debt collector after I missed their calls. I returned their call this morning to find out what it was about. They informed me that they were instructed by my bank to collect outstanding credit card payments.

I was surprised because previously I was handed to another debt collector. I paid the full amount of over P8,000 which was demanded from me and the first debt collectors gave me a letter showing that indeed I have cleared my debt. Now I just learned this morning that I have been handed to the second company
and according to them I still have an outstanding amount of nearly P5,000.

What I want to know is shouldn't the bank have written me a letter to inform me of this balance?

This sounds like a mistake to me. It sounds like the first debt collection company has miscommunicated with your bank about the amount they collected from you. We’ll get in touch with the bank in question and see if they can investigate and resolve this matter for you.

Dear Consumer’s Voice #3

My sister went shopping at the recently opened Rail Park Mall and was injured in the shop by a step-ladder while shopping. She had a cut which was bleeding. She tells me she was given painkillers, some "first aid procedures" and P30 to get a cab home.

Is this all a reputable store can do? I’m limited in that area but think they should have done more than that.

I’m not a doctor but I suspect that a bit more than this is called for. I suspect that if she was cut by a metal object she might need a tetanus jab? She might also need an apology from the store for her injury and the rest of us need assurance that they’re not going to injure us as well. I think she should visit her doctor for advice and keep a receipt for anything he charges her. The store will need to pay for that.