Christian Peregin
Aggrieved viewers urged to complain against TV providers
Irate customers are being urged to file complaints against Go and Melita with the Consumer and Competition Department if they feel aggrieved by the abrupt removal of popular stations Living TV and Comedy Central.
The Consumer Affairs Directorate within the department, which is investigating whether these companies broke consumer law, said it had, so far, received four formal complaints.
However, the directorate urged “all consumers who feel they are in any way aggrieved to lodge a formal complaint with the department”.
It explained that its investigations would establish whether Melita and Go had the rights to provide and sell the programmes, which are said by Living TV to have been aired illegally, without any of the necessary authorisation.
When it comes to public complaints, the directorate will liaise with the service provider with the aim of reaching an amicable solution, and if this is not reached, consumers should seek redress in the Consumers Claims Tribunal or in court. Meanwhile, dissatisfied customers are flooding the Consumer Affairs Council with complaints about the telecommunications sector, many involving the removal of Living TV and Comedy Central. The council is an independent body which advises the Finance Minister when compiling regulations about consumer affairs.
The council said it was “preoccupied” by the prevailing situation within the sector which was “probably the one where most complaints by consumers are being registered”.
“Such complaints could include possible misleading advertising, unfair contract terms, unfair commercial practices, difficulties to migrate from one operator to the other and instances of possible abuse of consumer rights,” the council said in a press release.
It was now holding meetings with the Malta Communications Authority and the department.
These statements further strengthen the claims by Nationalist MP David Agius that Melita and Go were “taking customers for a ride”.
Mr Agius, who earlier this year campaigned unsuccessfully to enable Maltese viewers to watch English, Italian and European football without having to subscribe to both providers, said this incident was an “added insult to the consumers”.
Meanwhile, the MCA has clarified its position with regard to subscribers’ compensation saying it was not empowered by the laws it administers to force service providers to compensate aggrieved subscribers.
“Nevertheless, as already stated by the MCA, this does not exclude the possibility that aggrieved consumers may seek redress before other forums,” a spokesman said, referring to its previous statement which said customers could approach the Consumer Claims Tribunal.
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...
12 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Chris Agius
Dec 30th 2010, 20:47
It seems that many here are jumping on the bandwagon and keep on claiming things which are nowhere to be found. Can ANYONE here QUOTE A CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT HE HAS SIGNED that the service provider cannot change the channel lineup ???
The famous "30-day notice period" which many are claiming DOES NOT apply for a change in the channel lineup, but for the terms of the CONTRACT, such as if they change pricing, service type (eg reduce bandwidth, reduce minutes, change charges, etc).
As regards the channels offered, for example, if one reads chapter 5 of the GO TV service terms and conditions, it is clearly specified in clause 5.3 that "We reser
ve the right to vary or change WITHOUT NOTICE the channel lineup included in any package ...." and three clauses which practically cover all the situations.
So all this shouts for compensation claims, breach of contracts, etc are in my opinion not
valid, and any MP or association claiming otherwise is simply taking people for a ride and playing for popularity.
People SHOULD learn to READ what
m.farrugia
Dec 30th 2010, 17:01
Jiena kont nippretendei li kull agenzija responsabbli tibda tinvestiga hija jekk kienx hemm ingann minn naha tal-providers meta dawn qabdu u daħlu dawn il-programmi bi ksur tal-ligi, u mhux thajjar lin-nies sabiex ghamnlu ilment ufficjali. dan ifisser li jekk ma jkunx hemm ilmenti ufficjali l-providers ghamlu sewwa li dahqu b'daqshekk nies. Ilment wiehed u mija xorta wahda ghandu ikun hemm investigazzjoni, kemm mid-diretorat tal-konsumaturi, l-ombudsman, il-Malta Communication Authority u l-ahhar u l-inqas il-pulizija. Lil dawn mhux se nghidilhom jiena x'ghandhom jkunu l-akkużi kontra dawn il-providers, zgur li huma bosta.
Peter Murray
Dec 30th 2010, 12:37
Whilst any and all assistance from consumers is always a help surely it falls incumbent upon the Consumer and Competition Department to constantly monitor and scrutinise the activity of all consumer service providers,irrespective of their service provisions, as part of their remit to protect the consumer as they should be proactive and not reactive,whilst in my experience they have been reluctant to intervene or offer substantive assistance whenever a mere member of the public registers a concern or complaint and are only now demonstrating some semblance of action protocol after MP's and Patlamenatry Secretary"s have become involved.
Julian Mompalao de Piro
Dec 30th 2010, 12:25
Is this the tip of the iceberg? How many other channels are being distributed illegally by Melita? What about National Geographic with adverts in Romanian? Is that a legal transmission?
Charles vella
Dec 30th 2010, 14:33
yes it is legal cuz its the one designed for Central Europe. What are illegal are the ones from Sky like Boomerang, Cartoon Network, Biography, History Channel... One day or the other these channels have to go and be replaced with the ones designed for Central Europe. It is illegal to watch adverts for Tesco, Argos etc etc on a channel designed for UK audiences. As a subsitiution Melita can air Comedy Central Europe from the European feed and as a subsitution for living then can air FX or Fox Life or Fox Crime which have a European Feed for Europe, which means us. It all depends how much cash Melita wants to dish out to obtain the rights for these channels! And if u want to watch UK TV either go to the UK or else get ur self Sky Digital!
S. Camilleri
Dec 30th 2010, 16:43
Better stick to commenting on what you know ... certainly not these matters. Receiving a signal meant for Romania or Greece or UK for that matter does not make that transmission illegal. It is at the convenience of the provider to allow melita or go to retransmit whatever feed is most convenient! And to MR Vella... it is not illegal to watch a Tesco ad you know!!
Stephen Koludrovic
Dec 30th 2010, 12:16
Walking down St Paul's street in Valletta, just on the side of Castille palace is the office of the Ombudsman. It is their duty to protect the ordinary citizens from these sort of abuses.
Hopefully they might have a say in this matter, if ever they find out why this office was ever created for.
c bugeja
Dec 30th 2010, 09:41
GO and Melita both made a mistake by transmitting illegal stations - but who is transmitting by means of sharing is also transmitting fully illegally so everybody is illegal. The right framework should be in place and start from day one and see that everyone is on a level playing field by transmitting legally!!! Remember that both GO and Melita employ thousands of people directly or indirectly
Joe Apap
Dec 30th 2010, 10:00
GO and Melita employ thousands of people directly or indirectly? What a joke.
Mark Fenech
Dec 30th 2010, 12:06
Well hundreds of thousands are also "employed" by them in the evening no ; )
c bugeja
Dec 30th 2010, 15:56
Go alone employ more than1000!!!! What i am saying is a legal structure where anyone can play on a level playing field. Where is the communications authority- it seems it has no idea how to tackle these isues
Alexia Vella
Dec 30th 2010, 09:18
Viewers should not only complain but should not pay and tear up their contracts because the service providers did not honour their contract so you are free to renounce to it without having to pay them anything. Don't be put off by their threats. Furthermore they cannot take you to court because what they were doing was illegal. Why is the Consumer and Competition Department not telling the people this when they know that they can do so? Are they the Consumers protectors or are they the companies protectors? Shame and shame again on the Consumer and Competition Department. Same applies to the Malta Communications Authority which seems to be hibernating like the rest of the authorities when companies are concerned.