The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Consumer Protection Council

  • Hyundai Sonata, Santa Fe: CPC provides channel to drive recall process in Nigeria 

    The Consumer Protection Council (CPC) has provided an online channel to aid Nigerian consumers in an ongoing recall of Hyundai Sonata and Hyundai Santa Fe Sport vehicles whose engines were replaced under two previous recalls.

    Mr Babatunde Irukera, CPC’s Director General said this in a statement on Thursday in Abuja.

    The Hyundai Motor Company in the United States announced a further recall on January16, 2019, of approximately 100,000  2011 – 2015 Hyundai Sonata and 2013 – 2014 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport vehicles whose engines were replaced under two previous recalls to inspect the fuel tube installation.

    The ongoing recall is to inspect and confirm proper reinstallation of the fuel tube to the high-pressure fuel pump.

    The Company also seeks to update its engine monitoring technology with a new device known as a knock sensor detection system.

    Irukera said, “Although the recall originated in North America, it is not inconceivable that some of the vehicles affected ended up in the Nigerian market, either primarily or secondarily.”

    He disclosed that “As an additional method to determine either of these possibilities, the Council is engaging appointed Hyundai dealers in Nigeria.

    “The Council requests anyone who purchased, owns or currently drives any of these specific Hyundai models, with the re-installed parts, to immediately contact the Council by sending an e-mail to contact@cpc.gov.ng”, he stated.

    According to the DG, “The e-mail should include the specific model, year, and version of the car, the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) and information about compliance with previous recalls.”

    He further advised that the e-mail should also include the name, telephone number and any other contact information of the owner or driver of the vehicle, while its subject should be Hyundai 2019 Recall.

    The DG indicated that CPC will provide relevant updates, warning, or advisories, where applicable.

  • ‘Egg vital to brain development’

    Egg is vital to brain development, Director-General Consumer Protection Council (CPC) Babatunde Irukere has said.

    He spoke yesterday to News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Lagos at an event organised to celebrate the World Egg Day and the inauguration of Egg Sellers and Distributors Association of Nigeria.

    Irukere, represented by Carmellus Anyanwu, the council’s head of Surveillance and Disbursement, said egg was a key component of national economy.

    He said the inauguration of the association was a call to duty, urging members to collaborate with poultry farmers and other stakeholders, as egg was a delicate and perishable product.

    Irukere expressed the commitment of the council to encourage trade associations.

    He enjoined members to work with global best practices.

    The National President of the association, Mrs. Olaide Grahams, said it would coordinate, motivate and pursue participation of all involved in the trade.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Telecomms subscribers jubilate as NCC, CPC move against abuse

    Consumers jubilated as major government regulators charged with protecting consumer interest and regulating the telecommunication industry moved to sanitise the telecommunication sector, in order to ensure consumers get value for their money.

    The Nigerian Telecommunication Commission [NCC] and the Consumer Protection Council [CPC] of Nigeria recently announced a commencement of a joint inquiry into the telecommunication industry in order to stem the myriad of complaints from consumers.

    Telecoms subscribers in the country registered over 13,880 abuses against the Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) in the 1st quarter, although complaints about poor services dropped during the period.

    According to the Nigerian Telecoms Consumer Complaints Report Q1 2018 released by the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), the number of complaints against MTN, Globacom, Airtel and 9Mobile though decreased by 3,367 from 17, 247 in Q4 2017 to 13, 880 in Q1, 2018.

    Further analysis of the statistics showed that MTN, probably being the largest operator in terms of market share and subscription base in Nigeria, got the highest complaints of 6,120 (44 per cent) against it.

    The NCC report, which contained the figures, also revealed that as at March 31, about 9.3 million telecoms service users had activated the Do-Not-Disturb (DND) code both on full and partial basis.

    On consumer complaints, the report put Airtel as second, with 3,143 (23 per cent) registered abuses against it. National operator, Globacom was third with 2, 885 (21 per cent) of the complaints, while 9Mobile, which is still looking for new investor, got 1,705 complaints, representing 12 per cent.

    The report also revealed that the about 150 million active subscribers complained bitterly of overbilling. Billing issues accounted for 7, 046 (51 per cent).

    This was followed by Value Added Service issues with 1, 897 (14 per cent); SMS issues accounted for 1, 104 (8 per cent); Call set-up challenges recorded 1, 189 (9 per cent).

    The billing-related complaints include deductions from activations of unsolicited VAS and telecom promotions and products; over deduction (inaccurate charges); charges for unsuccessful calls and undelivered SMS; and charges for caller ring back tune not downloaded, among others.

    The complaints against poor data services accounted for seven per cent, which was 1, 022; unsuccessful DND request got 298 complaints (two per cent); recharge card challenges had 454 complaints (three per cent); SIM-related issues got 429 complaints (three per cent); while sales promotion claims recorded 199 (one per cent) of all the complaints.

    Benson Ideji said he has suffered a lot of abuses from the telecomm providers. “I have complained severally to NCC without getting positive results so I am happy about this partnership and believe it will yield good results.”

    Mrs. Obiamaka Okoye of First Bank claimed, “Service providers in this country act as if they are above the law. I just hope this new move by the NCC and CPC will bring sanity to the industry.”

    “The one that annoys the most is the never-ending unsolicited calls one gets from the providers when you are in the middle of an important assignment,” fumed Shola Adebayo. “I hope this partnership will be able to curtail their activities,” she added.

    According to a joint statement from both government regulatory agencies, announcing the commencement of the joint regulatory consumer protection investigation in the telecomm sector, it said it was necessitated due to incessant and continual dissatisfaction and complaints from consumers.

    It also stated that “this joint inquiry which is in further partnership with relevant security agencies is also partly in response to a resolution of the Senate of the National Assembly requiring investigation and remedial measures of vital service issues and grievances by consumers.  Both NCC and CPC intend to keep abreast of this important issue to ensure enhanced operations and customer satisfaction.”

    The scope of the investigation essentially includes service quality, service issues such as call masking, unsolicited subscriptions, difficulty with unsubscribing to billed value added services, and transparency in billing with respect to clarity, data roll over, disclosures about real consumption, deductions for value added services and other key telecommunications services.

    Explaining further, both bodies said, “we take a very important step with respect to protecting consumers and ensuring that the telecommunication industry remains robust, continues its leading role in our economic growth and expanding prosperity to citizens.”

    Both NCC and CPC emphasised that the joint regulatory inquiry into consumer issues in the telecommunication industry was the right step to take as it promotes regulatory collaboration and all round protection.

    “It also ensures regulatory clarity and eliminates possible multiple regulatory approaches to similar issues. This is good for industry and operators as well as investors always appreciate such clarity and stability.  This is consistent and complimentary to the federal government’s commitment to ease of doing business and the economic recovery and growth plan which prioritises people, and firm but clear regulation that protects citizen, and promotes business and investment.”

    The expected outcomes are better services, more transparent charges and increased customer service responsiveness by telecommunications operators.  NCC and CPC have assembled a team of skilled operatives to discharge this assignment.

    However for the success of this joint inquiry into the telecom sector, there must be cooperation of consumers, operators and other stakeholders, particularly with providing information as may be, and when necessary that could be relevant to the subjects of the inquiry.

  • MultiChoice vs. CPC

    NOT surprisingly, there have been diverse reactions to last Monday’s ruling by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja, restraining MultiChoice, Nigeria’s leading Pay TV provider and operator of DStv and GOtv services from implementing new tariffs on its bouquet of products. In July, MultiChoice Nigeria announced new monthly subscription rates for its bouquet of products to take effect on August 1. Incensed that the review was in breach of an agreement between it and the Pay TV operator not to increase tariffs until subsisting issues bordering on consumer complaints were resolved, the Consumer Protection Council (CPC) had dragged the company to court.

    With the ruling thus effectively barring the company from undertaking any tariff review until the final determination of the matter, many have charged the CPC of overreaching its regulatory powers, more so as the ruling touches on the right of the company to determine the appropriate tariff to charge for its products.

    We see the issue differently. It seems to us as more about the duty of an agency charged with the protection of consumer rights to initiate an action on behalf of aggrieved consumers. In other words, it conduces, ultimately, to the right of the PayTV subscriber to get value for every kobo’s worth.

    Of course, it would have been a different matter if the complaints were spurious or mere fabrications, or as it is being made out by some – albeit superficially – that the issue is simply about tariff. We are talking here of a company whose dominant position makes it effectively a monopoly in the Pay TV space, one whose decades-old stranglehold on the industry confers enormous advantages which even the closest competitors do not enjoy – but whose management of consumer issues falls miserably short of global standards.

    Again, it bears stating that the issues certainly did not pop up yesterday nor did it start at the court room, contrary to what is being bandied in the public space. They are essentially about the poor quality of services rendered by the Pay TV provider. These range from subscribers not receiving signals even after subscription has been paid; disconnection of services prior to end of billing cycle with no credit applied for paid time lost; lack of clarity in terms and conditions; non-activation of free to air channels except when a consumer complained, and confusing toll-free customer care telephone channels. They also include complaints about arbitrary charges; confusing billing; blocking of some channels already subscribed; poor picture or signal quality with excessive and un-compensated downtime during both inclement and clear weather conditions, and lack of responsiveness, among others.

    More fundamentally is that these complaints have been subject of investigations at various times – first by the CPC under the then Director-General, Dupe Atoki, in 2015; followed by a public hearing by the House of Representatives in 2016; and then the most recent – launched by the CPC in November 2017. According to CPC, the high point of the discussion and subsequent agreement is that no new tariffs be implemented until the issues, most of which it claimed the company acknowledged, were resolved.

    That appears to be the crux of the matter. By hiking the tariffs while the discussions are still on-going, CPC accuses MultiChoice of “blatant bad faith”. It is hard to imagine a serious consumer protection agency going to sleep over what it perceived as breaches of an agreement let alone on an issue that touches fundamentally at the core its mandate.The CPC, to that extent, can hardly be faulted.

    More fundamentally however is that the current structure of the Pay TV market comes nowhere near the ideal of a truly liberalised one. Most certainly, the time has come for the Federal Government to initiate policies to terminate the current lopsided structure under which a dominant player would be allowed to call the shots. A good way to start is to not just seek to understand the reasons behind the high mortality rates of local Pay TV companies, but to deal appropriately with them.

  • MultiChoice: CPC hiding behind a finger

    It is hardly surprising that, for about two weeks, the Consumer Protection Council (CPC)/MultiChoice saga has been a major cause celebre. The matter arose from an interim court injunction the CPC secured against the implementation of MultiChoice’s new tariffs, which took effect on 1 August.

    The media, traditional and new, have brimmed with reports and perspectives on the matter. The move by the CPC, which targeted the tariff increase, naturally, got many to queue behind it. Conversely, many other commentators view the council’s attempt at fixing prices for a private enterprise, via the court, as carrying a whiff of Soviet-era communism-an action antithetical to free market economy.

    Stung by the allegation that it seeks to fix prices, Soviet-style (as one writer put it), the CPC has invested efforts in batting away that belief, principally because the law setting it up gives it no such powers. The council accused critics of its move of deliberately reconfiguring the narrative to depict it as seeking to control prices. Two commentators in major national dailies, for example, weighed in on the side of the CPC (of course, rehashing the position of Babatunde Irukera, the Director-General), saying the council’s action was timely, necessary and not an assault on market economy.  The CPC, in a statement signed by Irukera, said it “respects the fidelity in the operation of free market forces in arriving at prices of goods and services”. It added that the issues it is waging war against “are better articulated in the context of a Competition or Anti-trust legislation and regime, which Nigeria does not have”.

    In view of the above and its claim that it does not “intend to regulate price or, in any way, interfere with the commercial interface between MultiChoice and its customers in fixing price”, it is pertinent to ask what exactly the CPC seeks. Going by the explanations of the CPC and the suspiciously hired pro-price control commentators, what the council seeks is exactly what it claims not to seek: Price fixing.

    The Council, however, is hiding under what it thinks will get Nigerians excited. The CPC, after admitting the country does not have a competition and anti-trust legislation, came up with the largely specious position that it was conducting a broad investigation into MultiChoice’s operations as they concern customer complaints on issues such as failure to reconnect subscribers after subscription renewal, disconnection before subscription expiry, poor picture quality, signal degeneration in severe weather conditions and failure to adopt the “pay-as-you-go” billing model as it is allegedly the case in other countries where MultiChoice operates.

    It equally claimed that the Pay TV service company agreed that it would not raise prices for 24 months. I cannot claim to know whether or not MultiChoice agreed to that. However, I do not think there is a law stopping a business from raising prices because its operations are being investigated. I also do not know what serious business agrees not to raise prices in two years even when there is a need for such. Strange.

    That said, the issues, CPC correctly stated, had been subjects of public hearings at both chambers of the National Assembly, which invited the CPC to carry out an investigation. I recall that the investigation began in 2015 and was concluded in 2016, after which the CPC and MultiChoice jointly addressed a press conference in Lagos. The CPC Director-General at the time was Mrs. Dupe Atoki. Its counsel was Irukera. Media reports from the press conference quoted Mrs. Atoki as describing MultiChoice as a “model of compliance,” an admission that it had done as requested by the CPC. Why another investigation so soon? Why is a Pay TV company, whose services are used by less than 10 per cent of the population, getting the council as red-eyed as this?

    Power distribution companies, telcos and others seem to get a free ride. Is there something the CPC is not telling us?

    I understand the frustration that may arise from not being reconnected after subscription renewal and disruption of service before expiration of subscription. These definitely need more attention from MultiChoice. I am, however mystified that the CPC does not know that signal degeneration in bad weather is not exclusive to Nigeria or MultiChoice. It affects satellite TV broadcast where heavy snowing or rain (cloud, actually) occurs. What we have in Nigeria is rain, not snow. The CPC could have checked rain-fade on the internet.  Thick clouds interfere with the communication between the satellite and the dish. That is beyond the control of the provider.

    Another laughable claim is that MultiChoice operates a pay-as-you-go billing system in other countries, which a commentator ignorantly described as “an assault on national pride”. The internet can also be of help.  A country-by-country search on the company’s billing system, which I have done, shows that there is no such thing.

    What we are left with is a clear attempt to fix prices in a market economy. Writing in support of the CPC in Thursday’s edition of ThisDay, one Nasom Ngaro suggested that the CPC was right. Well, I did a little research of my own, using the US. What I found is that what is regulated-and this is backed by law-is rates that the Pay TV service can charge for the “basic tier”. Providers determine what is charged for premium services. As a matter of fact the Pay TV industry, in 2017, recorded a big victory against rate regulation via a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which upheld a 2015 decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that helped Pay TV companies avoid rate regulation.

    After the 2015 ruling, the FCC was sued by the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, the National Association of Broadcasters, and the Northern Dakota County Cable Communications Commission, which wanted to overturn the new restrictions on rate regulation. The groups had filed a petition for the review of the order as an impermissible construction of the statute and as arbitrary and capricious.

    Agboola, a public affairs analyst, writes from Abuja

  • Minister hails CPC’s bill of rights

    The Minister of Health, Professor Isaac Adewole, has commended the draft Patients’ Bill of Rights (PBoR), initiated and developed under the leadership of the Consumer Protection Council (CPC).

    The broad and comprehensive statement of rights of patients, their responsibilities, and obligations of healthcare providers is the largest step yet to protect patients and ensure the highest level of ethical conduct by healthcare professionals as well as enhance the quality and standard of care in the healthcare sector.

    The Minister’s enthusiasm and support for the initiative which he characterized as impressive, thoughtful and a matter of legacy was apparent and unmistakeable.

    The Minister made these assertions when CPC’s Director General, Babatunde Irukera led a team of CPC management and the working team on the PBoR to a working meeting with the Minister and leadership of the Ministry of Health on the document.

    The Minister and members of his team in particular commended the Council for also identifying the responsibility of patients and their families in the entire care value chain and healthcare ecosystem.

    He noted that he had gone through the document, the Legal Department of the Ministry had vetted it, and now critical senior and relevant directorates of the ministry have contributed to the document.

    The new Nigerian Medical Association President, Dr. Francis Faduyile, and members of his new executives, who were also on hand, expressed their appreciation for the initiative, and their familiarity with it, as it was part of handing over briefings from the previous and outgone executive team.

    Irukera, while responding, noted that the PBoR is an example of how the Council can collaborate with professional associations to foster consumer protection, improve internal ethics, and weed out quacks.

    He remarked that CPC was proud and grateful about the broad consensus and commitment that culminated in the document with all major professional associations in the healthcare sector, including nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, laboratory technologists, among others, working with the CPC in a working group to ensure the final document captures all the salient issues.

  • CPC, DISCOs and electricity consumers

    It was a sigh of relief for electricity consumers recently as the Consumer Protection Council (CPC) disclosed that “arbitrary billing and group disconnection of electricity consumers without consideration for those paying their bills constitute a gross abuse of consumer rights”. Though this is coming late from CPC, it is better it came than not.

    The Director General of the Council, Babatunde Irukera, was quoted as saying that “there is no excuse for how consumers are treated. “The key complaints that we receive are arbitrary, unsupported and unreasonable billing; people not being treated with dignity, the complaint resolution process is either lacking or unclear and there’s really no respect for people”.

    According to Irukera,” consumers’ complaints have not been primarily about supply, but about billing for non-existent supply, stressing that: “as a matter of fact, a vast majority of supply complaints are attributed to the fact that you are asking them to pay for something that was not supplied and the other significant reason is group disconnection”.

    Indeed, the power distribution situation has degenerated to a deplorable level and corroborates Irukera’s position that “DISCOs have gotten to a point where no one takes their bills seriously anymore, because they are considered outrageous”.

    It is incontrovertible that the power distribution situation in the country has not gone this bad since the several metamorphoses of organizations and bodies governing the use and distribution of electricity in Nigeria.

    Recently, over 20 rural communities on the 33 KVA at the outskirts of Aba were disconnected for over one week. Some conditions were stipulated which upon their fulfilment they would be re-connected. Such conditions include what is considered a death warrant. The communities were expected to sign a pact that they would fulfil the complete payment of the current charge plus 10 percent arrears. The irony of the whole episode is that some of the communities are on the current charge of as high as between N600,000 and in some instances close to N1million. Imagine what factors that would scale up the electricity consumption of a rural community to that outrageous amount. The arrears of one of the communities currently stand at over N8million, courtesy of the arbitrary billing system with the baptismal name “crazy bill”. If such community had consented to this death warrant, it means that assuming the current charge is N700,000, the community will part with N1.5million- the current charge plus 10 percent of the arrears. Thank God that community did not assent to that death warrant.

    Other conditions were not fair either. They include the compulsory application for a bulk prepaid meter and striking a deal with Enugu Electricity Distribution Company (EEDC) on how many days power will be supplied in a month and at a specific cost. The puzzle that defies resolution is here is the price services negotiated before they are supplied? That means that EEDC has been playing some pranks with these communities for some years now as with the proposed arrangement, power would be made available if an accord is struck with the consumers. Unfortunately, before now, there has been what is called “load-shedding arrangement”, where a community is denied power for some days in order to scale down the monthly bill.

    I don’t know what other consumers located across the country are suffering in the hands of other DISCOs, but if their experience is similar to that consumers suffer in the hands of EEDC, the hell is a better place for Nigerians.

    The multiple metamorphoses and the huge cash investment by the federal government on this sector, the stories of NEPA, PHCN, and what have you, have been that of woes and incessant cries of disappointment from their numerous consumers. The awful situation elevated incessant power outages to the status of norm instead of an aberration. The disappointing situations clothed the organizations with numerous and derogatory metaphors such as “Never Expect Power Always” (NEPA),”No Electrical Power at All; and “Please Hold a Candle Now” (PHCN), among others.

    Perennial power outages, unstable services by these bodies regulating the use of energy in the country informed the radical action by the Nigerian government which gave birth to the Electric Power Sector Reform Act of 2005. This Act called for the unbundling of the national power utility company into a series of 18 successor companies: six generation companies, 12 distribution companies covering all 36 Nigerian states, and a national power transmission company.

    Some key arguments reigned supreme at the height of the privatization process. Analysts were of the strong view that key public corporations embedded in critical sectors of the economy such as power are not privatized to protect the citizens against exploitation. It is an elementary economics that one of the essences of public corporation is to provide essential services to the public at a subsidized rate. Again, if the underlying motive of privatizing PHCN was to break monopoly, that motive was good as useless. For example, in Aba where the multi-billion Geometric Power Project could have provided a better and strong alternative, the project was sabotaged in a manner which is not devoid of politics.

    If Geometric were allowed to come on stream before now, residents of Aba, the latest Small and Medium Enterprises-hub would have been rescued from the terrible claws of the Enugu Electricity Distribution Company, EEDC, which holds sway in the Southeast.

    The activities of EEDC in Aba are both despicable and exploitative. It is inimical to commercial and artisanship spirits of the town. The attitude of the field workers of the establishment- who are arguably permanent staff- is irritating. They are impunity epitomized: disconnecting consumers at will even when there are clear evidences of payment of bills; failure to issue disconnection notices; indiscriminate re-connection charges without issuance of receipts as evidence of payment. These field workers are lords unto themselves and you dare not question their authority.

    The billing system is nothing to write home about. They implement what is called “estimated or crazing billing system” and the irony is that consumers may go some months without electricity but are duty-bound to pay bills. It is a common knowledge that the payment for products is to derive utility, which is the satisfaction derived from consuming a product. For EEDC, “utility” is a “strange concept”.

    The rural communities are not spared in this madness. They are under what is called “the bulk billing system” which runs upwards of N600,000 per month. Pundits are yet to terms with why rural communities- where it is crystal clear that energy consumption is very low because there are no industrial activities or gadgets that should scale up energy consumption- should be awarded such outrageous bills. More worrisome is the fact that these rural communities are peopled by predominantly peasant farmers whose means of livelihood are too inadequate to sustain them. The situation has forced communities and individuals to drag EEDC to court. But this option is as well frustrating because of the delay associated with our judicial system. Some communities that do not consider legal actions as viable options have resorted to self- help by physically manhandling EEDC staff.

    CPC is enjoined to up their ante and save consumers from fangs of the DISCOs, especially EEDC. EEDC is indeed a clog in the wheel of progress of Aba as an SME hub of the nation.

  • CPC swings into action on Ford Motors’ recall

    The Consumer Protection Council [CPC] of Nigeria has called on car dealers and consumers in possession of Ford Fusion, the Lincoln MKZ models from model years 2014-2018, and Ford Focus models of 2013-2016, to get in touch with the agency in view of the admittance of manufacturer’s defect by the Ford Motor company.

    Already, on March 14, 2018, the Ford Motor Company in the United States initiated a recall.  Approximately 1.4 million vehicles are affected by the recall.  The purpose of the recall is that; on some models, steering wheel bolts could become loose and cause the steering wheel to potentially detach.  This could lead to a serious accident.  Ford admits that it has become aware of two accidents and one injury that may have been caused by the problem.

    CPC Nigeria said the call from them is in pursuant with sections 2[b] and 2[c] of the consumer protection council act. Section 2[b] of the CPC Act, states that the Council should ‘‘seek ways and means of removing or eliminating from the market hazardous products and causing offenders to replace such products with safe and more appropriate alternatives.”

    In like manner, Section 2[c] of the Council Act mandates the Council to, “publish from time to time, list of products whose consumption and sale have been banned, withdrawn, severally restricted or not approved by the federal government or foreign governments.”

    In an interview with the Director General, CPC Nigeria, Mr. Babatunde Irukere, he disclosed that the agency had already engaged most of the local dealers in discussion.

    “We are already engaging local dealers. We told them, in case any of them has sold any of the vehicles, they should ensure it is retrieved and brought back to their workshops for the necessary correction.”

    Speaking in a telephone interview, the CPC helmsman said that most of the Ford vehicles affected were sold in Canada, Mexico and other North American states but added that from experience he was not ruling out the possibility of the existence of the vehicles in Nigeria as the brand was gaining popularity in Nigeria.

    “This particular recall applies to Ford Fusion and the Lincoln MKZ models from model years 2014-2018.  Specifically, every Fusion version; Fusion S, SE, Hybrid S, SE, Hybrid Titanium, Fusion Energi SE, Energi Titanium, Fusion Sport, Fusion Platinum, Fusion Hybrid Platinum and Fusion Energi Platinum.”

    With respect to Lincoln MKZ, the recall also applies to every version of the Lincoln MKZ; Lincoln MKZ Premier, Hybrid Premier, and Black Label.

    In addition to the above, but on a separate note, Ford is also recalling another 6,000 Fusion and Ford Focus models due to a risk of fire from a fracture in the clutch pressure plate.  The relevant model years are 2013-2016.

    Although the recall appears to be limited to North America, the Council is in the process of contacting local Ford dealers to verify the batch, lot or group of individual vehicles involved, and whether any was exported to, and sold in Nigeria. The Council recognises that some of the versions of the subject models were unlikely to have been manufactured for possible export to Nigeria.

    However, considering that some could have been, and proceeding in an abundance of caution for the safety of Nigerian consumers, the Council requests anyone who purchased, owns, or currently drives any of these Ford models to immediately contact the Council by sending an e-mail to the Council at contact@cpc.gov.ng.

    The e-mail should include the specific model, year and version of the car, the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) which is located on the top left side of the dashboard, and is in view from and through the windscreen of the vehicle.  The e-mail should also include the name, telephone number and any other contact information for the owner or driver of the vehicle.  The subject of the e-mail should be Ford 2018 Recall.

    However, one of the Ford motor dealers in Nigeria, Briscoe Ford, said they did not have any of the Ford vehicles being recalled in stock.

    Speaking with The Nation, Chukwudi Nwafor in charge of marketing for the company explained that the vehicles under recall were those manufactured between years 2016 and 2018.

    “The orders we have in stock are older stock, vehicles manufactured before 2016. We did not import any of the vehicles with manufacturer’s defect,” he noted.

    Explaining further, Okafor said that the vehicles in question were made for “North American region and not even for our region. We buy vehicles manufactured for our region only, as we do not even offer global warranty.”

    A senior marketing staff of Coscharis Motors of the Ford Division, Mr Felix Mahan, said that in cases like this, “the manufacturer will give out the vehicle chasis numbers to the dealers and with that we trace the buyers and recover the vehicles from them and rectify the problems without passing the cost to the customer.”

    However, throwing more light on the issue, spokesperson of Ford in Nigeria, Mr. Abiona Babarinde, said that the recent recall from Ford Motors U.S may not have a direct impact in Nigeria as dealers in Nigeria import Ford vehicles from South Africa and not the American version which has not been built for this region.

     

  • DANA Air passengers retrieve luggage from aircraft 

    DANA Air passengers retrieve luggage from aircraft 

    Fresh facts emerged on Thursday that the luggage of the 44 passengers that boarded the DANA Air MD 83 aircraft Flight 9J0363 from Abuja to Port Harcourt on Tuesday has been retrieved.

    The retrieve of the luggage a source close to the airline hinted came on the heels of complaints by some of the passengers who boarded the aircraft which overshot the runway of Port Harcourt Airport due to heavy rain.

    The source hinted that the Accident Investigation Bureau ( AIB), the agency saddled with the probe of air accidents and serious incidents is yet to release the aircraft to the airline.

    The source said the delay in releasing the aircraft may be unconnected with detailed probe into the serious incident.

    A team of investigators from the AIB, led by its director of operations, Captain Dayyabu Danraka is in Port Harcourt to unravel the remote and immediate cause of the incident and make recommendations to forestall future occurrence.

    Investigations revealed that DANA Air is reaching out to some of the 44 passengers for possible post trauma treatment.

    The offer for post trauma treatment, including possible payment of medical bills for those that may have sustained  injuries is to reduce the pain of the affected passengers.

    A source close to the airline said some of the passengers were impressed with the professionalism of the pilot in controlling the aircraft into the bush

    Meanwhile, Consumer  Protection Council (CPC) has called for calm among passengers and other stakeholders

    According to a statement by signed by CPC, Director General, Babatunde Irukera, the relevant aviation authorities have secured perimeter scene of the incident with ongoing probe on the damaged aircraft.

    Irukera said the Council is in communication with DANA Air and the NCAA as it awaits detailed investigations by the AIB in compliance with the standards and recommended practices of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)

    He said: “Thankfully, all passengers and crew were safely evacuated without injury. The Consumer Protection Council congratulates relevant airport and aviation authorities, as well as the airline for this safe evacuation and management of what could otherwise have been tragic.

    “The Council further calls for calm as we await more information and a detailed investigation by the Accident Investigation Bureau in compliance with ICAO standards.  In addition, the Council has been in communication with the airline and NCAA.

    “The Council understands that Dana Air has provided logistic support and accommodation to passengers. The Council insists this must comply with minimum standards in accordance with prevailing Regulations under Part 19, Nigerian Civil Aviation Rules (NCAR).

    “An open, transparent, sensitive and responsive approach by the airline and relevant authorities is vital to sustaining confidence and assuring consumers. The Council welcomes this openness and attention to consumers, including providing medical or psychological support where necessary.

    “The Consumer Protection Council in collaboration with the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, other aviation agencies and service providers remains available to all passengers in the sector to answer questions, provide assistance and required assurances at this and other times.”

    Read Also: AIB begins investigation into DANA Air incident

  • Court judgment on Fanta, Sprite begins investigation – CPC

    Court judgment on Fanta, Sprite begins investigation – CPC

    The Consumer Protection Council (CPC) has launched a detailed investigation into the alleged danger of mixing Fanta or Sprite with Vitamin C.

    CPC’s Director-General, Mrs Dupe Atoki, announced this in Abuja on Thursday.

    “The Consumer Protection Council is keenly interested and extremely concerned about the questions that have arisen from and on account of this judgement.

    “As such, the discoveries therein the CPC is launching a broad and detailed investigation as a matter of urgency.

    ‘’Indeed the judgement only serves as a subject of bringing this information to the CPC’s attention. The council would conduct its own investigation separately.’’

    According to her, the CPC was interested because Fanta, Sprite and Coca Cola are the most widely consumed beverages in Nigeria.

    Atoki said that the investigation was also hinged on the fact that vitamin C was one of the most consumed medications for both children and adults in the country.

    She said that the NBC products and vitamin C were routinely consumed in Nigeria with no restrictions to access and availability.

    According to her, the council would ask key questions such as: “Is Sprite and Fanta at the time of production potentially harmful to consumers when consumed with vitamin C?

    “If yes, what is NBC’s obligation to consumers and has NBC fully discharge the obligation?

    According to her, Pursuant to the CPC Act, the council is interested in discovering what steps NBC took after the testing and confiscation of Fanta and Sprite by the UK authorities.

    Atoki said that CPC had written to NBC to provide certain information to enable it conduct its own investigation on the matter not later than Thursday March 23, 2017.

    She said that it was not the duty of NBC to tell Nigerians that their product was okay for consumption.

    A Lagos state High Court has awarded a N2 million cost against NAFDAC for failing Nigerians by certifying Fanta and Sprite fit for human consumption even after the drinks were declared unfit for human consumption in the UK.

    The court also ordered NAFDAC to direct the NBC Plc to include a warning on the bottles of the product that its content cannot be taken with Vitamin C.