For many South Africans, losing money on botched home renovations or defective second-hand cars has become an all-too-common frustration. But recent rulings by the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT) offer a glimmer of hope, because two suppliers have been fined and ordered to refund more than R697 000 to consumers who were left out of pocket.
The cases involved WP Motors Sales (Pty) Ltd, trading as WP Motors, and Home Renovations Cape Town (Pty) Ltd, both of which were found to have contravened key provisions of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). Following investigations by the National Consumer Commission (NCC), the Tribunal ruled in favour of the affected consumers, imposing penalties on the suppliers.
Poor workmanship and abandoned project
In October 2021, a consumer entered an agreement with Home Renovations Cape Town for extensive home improvements, paying R478 545 upfront. Additional renovations were later quoted at R58 810, but as the work progressed, the consumer identified defects and was dissatisfied with the quality of the workmanship.
Under section 54 of the CPA, consumers have the right to receive services performed in a “manner and quality that persons are generally entitled to expect”. The investigation found that the company failed to rectify the defects, halted all work, and demanded outstanding payments before completing the project.
The Tribunal ruled that the supplier had violated sections 54(1)(c) and 54(2) of the CPA, imposing a R50 000 fine and ordering a refund of R420 748.20 to the consumer.
The NCC was also tasked with ensuring the refund is processed.
Faulty Ford Ranger and a denied refund
WP Motors sold a 2015 Ford Ranger 2.2 TDC XLS D/C for R276 607.49 on 17 January 2020. Just two days later, the vehicle’s engine failed, prompting the buyer to request a full refund. However, WP Motors refused to cancel the transaction, instead insisting on repairing the car and blaming the consumer for the breakdown.
The Tribunal found that WP Motors had contravened sections 55(2)(b) and (c), and section 56(2) of the CPA, which grant consumers the right to return defective goods within six months of purchase, at the supplier’s expense.
“The consumer was deprived of using and enjoying the vehicle he purchased,” the Tribunal noted in its ruling.
It further criticised WP Motors for unfairly forcing the consumer to accept a repair instead of a refund.
“On the contrary, WP Motors unfairly placed the consumer in an untenable position by compelling him to accept the vehicle against his will when it insisted on repairing the vehicle. The supplier’s refusal to address the dispute further caused the consumer severe inconvenience,” the Tribunal stated.
As a result, the Tribunal imposed an administrative penalty of R200 000 and ordered WP Motors to refund the full amount to the consumer.
The supplier’s conduct was declared as prohibited.
Welcoming the rulings, NCC acting commissioner Hardin Ratshisusu underscored their significance in upholding consumer rights.
“Both convey a strong message to suppliers of goods and services that consumer rights must be respected. The NCC believes the Tribunal’s findings will deter other suppliers from engaging in prohibited conduct,” he said.
