Consumer Department probes GO, Melita, over dropped TV Channels
TV service providers Melita and Go are being investigated to establish whether any consumer rights were violated when they dropped two stations from their channel line-ups, which may have been transmitted illegally.
Parliamentary Secretary Chris Said has asked the Consumer and Competition Department to look into the matter, adding that a preliminary outcome should be published within “a few days”.
His announcement comes in the wake of accusations by Nationalist MP David Agius that Melita and Go were “taking customers for a ride” and that customers deserved compensation.
This month, both providers announced they would have to remove Living TV and Comedy Central from their line-ups because broadcasting rights could not be cleared for Malta.
But a spokesman for Living TV – which is owned by the same company that distributes Comedy Central in the UK – said Melita and Go never had the rights to transmit.
“Living is a channel licensed in the UK, exclusively for audiences in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. We do not have the rights to broadcast our programming to other territories and would not be able to offer the channel to paying Maltese audiences even if we wanted to,” the Living TV spokesman said.
Melita and Go never reacted to these comments but both said they provided alternative channels to make up for the removal of the two stations.
Irate customers questioned why they were made to pay for channels which came free to providers and some demanded compensation arguing they agreed to prepaid packages when Living TV and Comedy Central were still available.
The Malta Communications Authority says the law “does not foresee the granting of compensation in such cases”. It said operators who decided to change any terms or conditions of service were obliged to notify subscribers 30 days in advance, giving customers the right to withdraw from the contract during this period without incurring any penalties.
However, this would not apply in cases of force majeure. “In this case, the authority considers that this provision did not apply... as the change was not instigated by the service providers themselves.”
This reasoning was not appreciated by Mr Agius who argued that if his wife forced him to end a contract with a television provider he could not get away without consequences.
Go was the first provider to announce discontinuing both stations and Melita had said negotiations were ongoing. Melita later said it would remove the stations in the second week of January but Living TV disappeared abruptly last Monday. Comedy Central is still being aired on Melita but is expected to be dropped in January.
Asked for an update on the long awaited reformed Consumer Department, a spokesman for Dr Said indicated the Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority would be fully functional “in the first part of 2011” after a second reading of the draft Bill announced in November.
(The Times)
See also:
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
39 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
DGalea
Dec 30th 2010, 16:18
If GO and Melita were making us pay for transmissions of programs that they were getting illegally, is this not as bad as selling pirated material on DVDs at some monti market or selling contraband cigarettes? In other countries, the chairmen of the companies would have, by now, done the right thing and resigned..
M. Mizzi
Dec 30th 2010, 05:27
Why not also probe he Gonzipn fiscal measure in the 2008 pre-budgt document proposing
the removal of the TV the licence fee, a proposal was never mentioned in subsequent budgets?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20101011/local/unpaid-tv-licences-may-incur-legal-action
Philip Hili
Dec 30th 2010, 00:22
What a shame!!!
We were made to pay for apparently illegal transmissions. To add insult to injury, we were forced to sign an agreement which bind us for one and a half or two years, because otherwise we would not have been granted the offer these two providers were offering at that time.
If I do something illegal, I will be apprehended and face charges.
What about these people?
N. Bonello
Dec 29th 2010, 23:05
I'm sorry but a 'Force Majeure' would be if the satellite was hit by a UFO and stopped transmitting or the provider ceases operations.
I don't think a 'Force Majeure' can come about when you engage in an illegal activity to provide a service and happen to get caught - so cant provide that 'illegal' service any more.
D.Galea
Dec 29th 2010, 17:37
I think that any inquiry is another income to specific persons and it stops there. The general customer will not get anything in return even if the board manage to say something in favour of the consumer
D.Galea
Dec 29th 2010, 17:34
The Malta Communications Authority says the law “does not foresee the granting of compensation in such cases”.
Excuse me MCA but you were there when the law was issued.....on the other hand every one know that all laws are filled with loop holes that the big and great are able to go through without any consequences but this cannot be said in favour of the loyal citizen.
However, this would not apply in cases of force majeure. “In this case, the authority considers that this provision did not apply... as the change was not instigated by the service providers themselves.”
In my opinion the providers are to be fully blamed because they offered a packet that was not theirs in the first place.
ONCE AGAIN ANOTHER SHORT END OF THE STICK FOR THE LOYAL CONSUMER
duncan cassar
Dec 29th 2010, 14:55
ARA MHUX XI HAGA GDIDA DIN MHUX KOLLOX HEKK MALTA BIEX QED NISKANTAW !!!!!!!!!!!!!CUSTOMER IS ALWAYA RIGHT !!!! TO PAY THE BILLS !!!!!!!!!
P.Cassar
Dec 29th 2010, 14:37
GAS PROVIDERS............... XALATA WITH CONSUMERS
GO, MELITA.................... XALATA WITH CONSUMERS
REGULATORS..................... XALATA WITH OUR MONIES PAID FOR NOTHING
MINISTERS ...........................XALATA WITH OUR MONIES
WE COMMON MORTALS FOOTING THE BILLS FOR ALL.
NATION OF IDIOTS ?????
Nick Falzon
Dec 29th 2010, 18:50
You're so right. And nobody ever takes responsibility or resigns. What a mess.
louis scicluna
Dec 29th 2010, 14:11
How come well established opinionists rarely write about this "well organized fleecing" on helpless consumers. Everyone from "top to bottom" knows bout this CARTEL. Have we not been promised fair competition , resulting in primary consumer rights, before the EU referendum.
Stephen Koludrovic
Dec 29th 2010, 13:53
In all fairness to the consumers, the ceos of both companies should be fired, the said companies heavily fined, and the consumers get a reduction on their monthly rates.
R. Grech
Dec 29th 2010, 12:29
May I suggest that the MCA and the Consumer Department ensure that both GO, Melita or any other provider are authorised to broadcast a channel before they get us consumers to pay for it.
I am a GO subscriber which honestly was better than Melita but these stunts to replace channels with trashy free satellite feeds is just plain daylight robbery.
martin pisani
Dec 29th 2010, 12:21
It is totally disgusting and Go and Melita have us over a barrel as there is nothing else decent on tv if u dont have Go or Melita. I 1st complained when Go removed the Eurosport Classic, which was paid for and contracted....then i complained again with the farse of comedy and living dispute only to be told, ur contract states that Go reserve the right to change, update or cancell any channel at their own choice, when i replied saying that they were airing something illegal which I had already paid for they said....wait for it........Eh sorry he!!!!!!!!!!
M.Pisani....extremely Pi**ed OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ray Buhagiar
Dec 29th 2010, 12:40
If you have the space, install a satellite with rotator and you could see thousands of FTA stations. When I have time I watch Films in English on MBC2, MBCaction, MBCPersia, MBCMax. My kids watch their cartoons such as PopGirl, tinypops.
The only downside is Football, although during the worldcup I was able to watch all the games.
Philip Hili
Dec 30th 2010, 01:46
@ Ray Buhagiar
I will be very much pleased if you furnish me with further information such as what type of satelie you need etc.
Thanks
Joyce Grech
Dec 29th 2010, 11:51
It is interesting that the MCA considers this issue to fall under force majeure ".. as the change was not instigated by the service providers themselves.” How can they say this when Go and MElita both knew for the last years that they had no right to transmit these channels and yet were happily collecting fees from consumers? I feel that the least Go and Melita can do is offer subscribers the right to withdraw from their contract without compensation or else reduce the monthly fee. If they seriously think that Animal Planet and the Food Network Channel are a suitable replacement for Living TV and the Comedy Central they must be out of their minds. Whatever happened to Bravo, Trouble, Paramount Comedy etc? Are these channels (that were once broadcast by Melita) available? Or were they also being obtained illegally? MCA please wake up.
c falzon
Dec 29th 2010, 11:28
And then if u break the contract.....they make you pay the penalties!!!!! Ara kemm qedin sew!
Charles Micallef
Dec 29th 2010, 11:27
quote 'Melita and Go never reacted to these comments but both said they provided alternative channels to make up for the removal of the two stations, unquote
They provided two inferior channels that show totally different content to the one they sold us in the package and of course they have not reacted, they clearly have something to hide and egg on their face and cannot offer a realistic explanation!
They have been charging the viewers for two channels that they obtained for free!
Some call this bareface cheek!
M.L Vassallo
Dec 29th 2010, 11:05
It would be interesting to know what was the 'cost' claimed by both Go and Melita for the dropped channels when they justified their tariff structure with the respective authorities. Was it '0' or not? If not '0' customers have a right for compensation because they were being charged for something which the ISP never paid for!
E. Azzopardi
Dec 29th 2010, 11:01
It is very evident that the following have lost a lot of points on this one and I think it will not go unnoticed:
1. Malta Communications Authority
2. Consumer and Competiton Department
These two are there to give service to the public, which is paying their handsome salaries and perks. Dr Said, had to ask them to look into the matter? Haven't we got any initiative? After all this is their job!!!!
3.Melita plc
4. GO plc.
The public deserves much better, much much better. Please do not complain, repeat do not complain, if you have lost business and when you continue to lose this business.. The people are not stupid
T Mifsud
Dec 29th 2010, 10:49
If the MCA is powerless infront of such blatant consumer abuse by both providers, than MCA should be dismantled. If it is going to blame the laws then it should be dismantled anyway because it was the MCA that should have put forward proposals for law changes.
The MCA woke up and reacted to a trigger from a comment of an MP. Never mind all these years that consumers have been abused. Those consumer complaints that MCA saw all these years were not worth moving a muscle. Now that an MP said something, jumping MCA, it woke up. You see, with the sleepiness of MCA, consumers got used to being abused and this became the norm in Malta.
About friggin time!
Noel Camilleri
Dec 29th 2010, 10:41
How interesting when considering the other article re. complaints on Maltese businesses went up by 200%. Pity the majority of those complaints were originating from non-Maltese customers. We must all learn the lesson and raise our expectations vis-a-vis what we pay! A politician had to speak up!
Shame on both Go and Melita (the 2 most customer-abusing companies in Malta) as well as on MCA for not identifying this (+ others?) on time (btw: what is MCA's role in such matters?) A TV station, or the favourite TV series, cannot be compensated by another TV station! Both companies should not have promised to offer such a service!
Mr Politician, Messers GO and Melita, Mr MCA - what about compensation for TV stations to which the service provider I am subscribed with loses the TV rights. I am referring to the TV station of my favourite Football Club. Can this be compensated by the ridiculous Malta Stars station?? But wait, I'm still paying (or wasting!) the same monthly fee!
After all - I know this is another issue which will be totally forgotten after a few days (if not hours) - with no actions taken!
tony fava
Dec 29th 2010, 10:36
And what about their cannot-be-worse services, I mean the telephone service. I have been complaining again and again. I am without a telephone service more than with it. I have complained again and again and again. The service provider simply ignores you. What they care about is that you pay them regularly. Unfortunately I have been doing that for ages. As if nothing is happening. They just simply dont care. I have referred the matter to the Consumer Protection Dept. To say the truth they took up the matter, only one complaint that is. And then all my further complaints fell on deaf ears. I have lost hope and still I am paying regularly for a service which I would not call a service but total harassment. Parliamentary Secretary please note.
Dominic Fenech
Dec 29th 2010, 10:01
So the Consumer and Competition Department only stirs when a politician speaks? Try renaming it Politician and Competition Department.
Jimmy Magro
Dec 29th 2010, 09:55
For me this is an Only in Malta scenario.
This confirms that the civil service is dead. Why should the Consumers Department be requested to investigate a matter from a holder of a political office? The Consumer Affairs Department must have its own balls to take its own initiative on matters affecting us the consumers that continue to support the local business community, as in many cases we face monopolistic situation (or at least duopoly).
If the civil service is so dead as it needs the PS to make a request to take action then we are really in the abyssinia.
I quite certain that nothing will change.
Ray Buhagiar
Dec 29th 2010, 10:27
Mr Magro - You hit the nail on the head.
my question is: Why had it to be David Aguis remarks for authorities to investigate this can of foul worms?
I do not have GO or MELITA. Long time ago I invested in a satellite system and have abundance of films/documentaries to watch. The only downside is sport especially football. But internet solved that as well.
and btw Prosit David.
Jimmy Magro
Dec 29th 2010, 11:36
@Mr. Ray Buhagiar
99% I hit the nail on the head. The remianing 1% I hit my finger. But I have calculated that it is worth to take the risk and speak out the truth as in Malta we have 99% lackeys and I have to form part of the other 1% to defend the interest of the citizens.
I have posted several documentaries on Facebook on how citizens take action in the US to fight big government and big business but in Malta Facebook members want to play idiot -alienating games. It is a shame that there is no single Maltese citizen that is using Facebook and other social networks to bring change in Malta and the world.
I have also created a group to remove all Monarchies in Europe as this is not democratic. EU member states must be a Republic - in 2011 we must have full democratic institutions and Monarchies are not.
Jan-Wouter Stigter
Dec 29th 2010, 17:26
Nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I can assure Mr Magro that the Dutch monarchy is well and truly supported by a vast majority of the electorate.
As for Go and Melita: so we have been taken for a ride - paying for things that were free in the first place and illegal to boot; and nobody at MCA or elsewhere batted an eyelid. That's what you get with so-called authorities that are only there to provide cushy jobs for well-connected people.
Jimmy Magro
Dec 29th 2010, 18:20
@Jan-Wouter Stigter
The argument that people have an appeal for the Queen has nothing to do with democracy. I understand that you have little know about the matter. Furthermore, I think you have to study the history of the Dutch Monarchy to know what scandals they were involved in, also leading to abdication of the throne.
A MOnarchy is not a democracy. How can we the Europeans go to Iraq, Afghanistan, Latin America, Asia, eastern europe preach democracy when the majority of EU member states are still ruled by a Monarch. It is understandable that the people we go to teach, ask these questions and send us back to hell.
Jan-Wouter Stigter
Dec 29th 2010, 19:40
If you want to lecture me, Jimmy, pick something you know more about than I. There has never been an abdication in the history of the Dutch monarchy. Anyway, the support for the monarchy is surveyed regularly and is stable and solid. And you know why? Because we have a parliament that has no hesitation whatsoever to send governments packing if they fail to do their job. We don't need a president - the people rule.
Jimmy Magro
Dec 29th 2010, 21:15
Abdication of Queen Juliana:
On 26 August 1976, a toned-down, but nonetheless devastating, report on Prince Bernhard's activities was released to a shocked Dutch public. The Prince's own letter of 1974, to Lockheed Corporation, demanding "commissions" be paid to him on Dutch government aircraft purchases was very damaging evidence of improper conduct by the inspector-general of the Dutch armed forces. Criminal charges were not pressed by the government out of respect for Queen Juliana, whose later abdication was tacitly understood to be directly related to her husband's conduct.
Jaap Brugmann
Dec 30th 2010, 12:09
Your are absolutly right Jan, some of these so called experienced Maltese Managers or whatever, should take a leaf from us Dutch and needless to say should spend a few months in our country to see how things work possitivly and competition wise for all the customers, after all we say the customer is king, unfortunitly not in Malta, the customer in your little island is driven like sheep or goats in the case of Gozo. So Look-Listen and Learn from the big boys my friends. J.Brugmann-Lelystad(Flevoland)
J Zammit
Dec 29th 2010, 09:48
Correct me if i am wrong here, but should we also get applicable channels, like BBC or Aljazeera, from the link below for free(or at least with the smallest basic packages) since they are FTA:
http://www.angelcomms.ie/freetoairsatellitechannellist.asp
G A Bonello
Dec 29th 2010, 10:05
Sorry, but you are wrong. The link you added was a link to FTA channels in IRELAND.
They do not apply to Malta. Each country has it's own FTA rights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-to-air
The only FTA channels Malta has the right to are the local stations and any Pan-European channels with continental FTA rights (ie Eurosport, Euronews, CNN, etc).
J Zammit
Dec 29th 2010, 10:11
Thanks for the clarification :)
I Micallef
Dec 29th 2010, 09:41
"In this case, the authority considers that this provision did not apply... as the change was not instigated by the service providers themselves." OF COURSE IT WAS MR REGULATOR. IT WAS INSTIGATED BY GO AND MELITA BECAUSE THEY WERE APPARENTLY TRANSMITTING WITHOUT HAVING THE NECESSARY RIGHTS. Therefore the channels should never have been in their package. What the regulator is saying is that an illegal act is not extraordinary and should not give rise to compensation!! What a warped way of thinking. One has to ask if there any more of these surprises. Has the MCA verified that all channels offered by the two companies are valid?
And why does Chris Said have to ask for an investigation? Shouldn't the Consumer Dept show a minimum of initiative and do what it's supposed to do : PROTECT THE CONSUMER! without having to be told.
By the way what happened to the much touted launch of Sky Malta announced in January and was supposed to take place this year? Or did the project die before being born.
c zammiit
Dec 29th 2010, 09:22
L-MCA la ma tista taghmel xejn sinjal li qed tahdem bl ligijiet bla sens. So ghalhekk sur parlamentari..ibdluhom. U ibdluhom mhux fuq xii parir ta xi nies li ikunu jew kiienu xi darba jahdmu ma xi operatur...ghax tispiccaw ma tibdlu xejn!! Ghax bhas soltu inkella konna u ghadna nghixu f pajjiz ....
P Agius
Dec 29th 2010, 09:20
Will the authorities investigate the Go and Melita on fraud? If it's true that they were transmitting these channels without authorisation, that can be classified fraud - they're making profit out of something obtained illegally.
r ferriggi
Dec 29th 2010, 09:18
altough at fist glance,,, we do not seem to be a banana republic or the type of country where anything goes,,,,,,,
lets admit it : the population here in malta gets robbed on a daily basis by businessmen tv channnel providers, utility companies, supermarkets, clothes shops ,,,, and its own government.
if you put everything in one basket,,,,,, ( INCLUDING OUR LAUGHABLE WAGES) this island must be one OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE places to live in in europe.