CONSUMER COUNCIL REPORTS ON DOOR-TO-DOOR SALES

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31783, 13 September 1968, Page 26

CONSUMER COUNCIL REPORTS ON DOOR-TO-DOOR SALES

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, September 12. The case of a 17-year-old girl who was sold $326 worth of linen on her doorstep —and was then escorted to her savings bank by the door-to-door saleswoman to withdraw $65.50 for a deposit—was cited today in the annual report of the Consumer Council.

The council said the girl was sold 17 pairs of bed sheets and 26 pillowcases during her mother’s absence, and described the case as “one of the worst” the Consumers’ Institute had received.

It said in its annual report —tabled in Parliament—that during the last year the institute continued to receive a steady stream of complaints about the activities of door-to-door salesmen. “The activities of encyclopaedia salesmen continued to worry the institute,” the council said.

“The latest gimmick is to offer the encyclopaedia ‘free’ but then it turns out there are compulsory ‘extras’ which cost about $300.” The council said the institute welcomed the new Door-to-Door Sales Act, 1967, which

came into force in April this year, as giving needed protection for the consumer. “But it noted with concern that by late March attempts were already being made to circumvent its intent. “This situation, will be kept under examination, and the council will not hesitate to recommend Government action to block moves designed to get around the Act,” the report said. The council said that in too many ways consumers were open to exploitation—especially through the mails and through the activities of door-to-door salesmen. “Plausible Stories” “It is not that they are gullible but simply that they take a very plausible story at face value,” it said. “When a sales pitch contains not only suspect claims but also facts which are undeniably true, many people have trouble sorting out the good from the bad.” The public was exploited, too, because persons—whether qualified or not—could set up in business and claim to be able to carry out particular services. “We had numerous complaints from people (especially elderly folk) who had been panicked into paying high prices for treatment of their houses against insect infestation. “False threats were made that local body or Government action might be taken—even that demolition of the home might be ordered,” the council said.

“Apart from the dishonesty of the tactics, there were serious doubts as to the effectiveness of the materials used, their application and the

qualifications of the operators.” There was a great need for regulating servicing trades to ensure that operators had sufficient competence and experience and the resources to undertake the work they held themselves out to do. Failure Of Firms The council said it was greatly concerned about the dangers of money-in-advance transactions—whether they were lay-by, door-to-door or mail-order sales—because in recent years a number of firms had failed and customers had lost heavily. Referring to the motorist consumer, the council said: “As consumers, motorists have much to put up with—particularly in New Zealand where the supply of new cars is limited.”

A survey by the institute of just on 200 of its members who had bought new cars showed an average of between two and a half and three and a half defects per car for each of four main firms. The institute believed there were as many proprietary medicines for sick cars as there were for sick people—and most were as worthless. “Saving Petrol” One of the worst examples during the year was the turbospark power converter which cost $6 and which the advertiser claimed enabled the motorist to run his car “half on petrol, half on air” and save “gallons of petrol each and every month.” An Australian device of the same name was pronounced worthless by the Australian Consumers’ Association but as far as was known the New Zealand advertiser did not distribute the device. “He simply collected money for a period and disappeared,” said the report. “It is not known how many persons lost money.”