Knowledge shared is power gained

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 15 July 2014)

The following complaint was brought to the attention of Consumer Court last week: “Woermann & Brock does it again! Shelf price N$ 22,49; at the till they charge N$ 23,99. It happens all the time and over and over again. No apologies, nothing, just sheer ignorance! I am convinced that this a deliberate rip off, as this happens regularly. When will the consumers stand up to this?”

The customer also included a photograph of the till slip next to the unit price displayed on the shelf to show that the two differed. Consumer Court contacted the General Manager, Mr Rudolph Fourie, and requested feedback from him regarding the consumer’s complaint. He returned our mail and indicated they would attend to the complaint and thanked us for bringing this to his attention.

On Saturday, I was at my local grocery store (which happens to be Woermann Brock Hyper in Khomasdal), and noticed there was a hive of activity on the floor. Upon closer inspection I noticed that in each row there was a supervisor in charge of checking the price on the shelf against the barcode reading they received when scanning the product. It was very heartening to see the company reacting to the complaint in such a short period of time. A little later, while strolling near the mayonnaise shelf, I noticed an elderly couple doing their shopping. The old lady reached for a particular brand of mayonnaise when I noticed her male companion (husband?), call her attention to the pricing on the shelf. They got into some discussion, and then she returned the brand she had taken and took another brand which obviously had a better pricing option.

This is what the Consumer Court hopes to achieve on behalf of the consumer – having their complaints heard AND acted upon by the business community. Well done to Woermann Brock and we will keep watching to see they adhere to the legal requirement of displaying the correct price on the shelf, and ensuring the consumer is being charged the displayed price at the counter.

Scanner Price Accuracy Code

The consumers in Namibia are regularly being cheated out of their hard earned cash as most modern retailers use shelf pricing that differs from the price the consumer has to pay at the checkout. To combat this we need to put pressure on getting a “Scanner Price Accuracy Code” to be adhered to by all retailers in the country.

The purpose of the code should be to:

• Visibly demonstrate the commitment by retailers to scanner price accuracy;
• Provide retailers with a consistent national framework for dealing with scanner price accuracy issues; and
•  Provide the consumers and the retail industry with a mechanism for consumer redress in scanner price accuracy cases, to be managed by a joint committee of retailers and consumer bodies.

It is further proposed that all retailers implement an Item Free Scanner Policy whereby a customer presents proof that the scanned price at the checkout counter is higher than the price on the shelf (or even higher than advertised) the lower price will be deemed to be the one that will be charged. It is also proposed that should the correct cost of the product be less than N$ 100, then the store will give the product to the consumer free of charge. If the correct cost of the product is more than N$ 100, the store should give the consumer a discount to the value of N$ 100 on the product price.

If the retail industry is willing to work together with consumer bodies, the Namibia Competition Commission can be approached to assist and even endorse such a code.

After the weekly column was written, I received an email from Woermann and Brock stating the following: “On behalf of Woermann & Brock, we apologise for the inconvenience of the customer. We do have a Company Policy in place that when this kind of situation arise, the customer will receive the first item for free, and the second item can be purchased at the lower price indicated on the shelf”. Well done – now we must share it amongst our fellow consumers.

Where medicine is loved, there is a love of humanity

(First Published in New Era Newspaper -9 July 2014)

Recently I visited one of the stores that sells a range of beauty and personal hygiene products in the western part of Windhoek. My fiancé, who is presently pregnant, wanted to purchase something for her flu and had me tag along. Once inside the shop (which I have never actually visited before), I noticed they stocked a large variety of products including pots, pans, and other white goods. In our case, we moved to the section dealing with vitamins and cough mixtures to see what was available. I requested one of the shop assistants to help us but it was painfully clear the person had no real training on the products that were offered. After some discussion, my fiancé and I felt it would be better to visit a nearby pharmacy. The same products were available at the pharmacy and we requested the pharmacy assistant to give us some guidance. After ascertaining that we were “expecting”, she quickly pointed out that it is not healthy to take some of the products and suggested we should rather look at effervescent (soluble in water) flu medications.

I took the time to speak to the pharmacist after this recommendation and asked about the level of training needed to be an assistant at their pharmacy. The owner informed me that they tried to take students in the field of biology or at least a three month course in first aid. In addition, only the pharmacist may actually suggest a product for a client that is pregnant or breast-feeding.

When I asked about the nearby hygiene products chain store, the pharmacist did admit that they were facing fierce competition and it was unfair as the staff who were working at the chain store were mostly school drop-outs with little or no education in basic medical care.

After this discussion, I took to the Internet to gauge the reality of people purchasing over the counter medicines. I came across the following definition by an international pharmaceutical company:

“Over-the-counter (OTC) medicines can be purchased at a pharmacy without a prescription. These include Schedule 0, 1 and 2 drugs, such as medication for headaches, coughs and colds, minor skin conditions, etc. It is always a good idea to consult the pharmacist (or assistant) when choosing an OTC product. They are trained to ask you some important questions in order to give you the individualised care you need.”

Now it begs the question, what training does the person need in a supermarket or chain store to suggest (prescribe) such a product when they have received no training in this matter at all? I went to the law books and looked up the Medicines and Related Substances Control Act 2003 as well as the Pharmacy Act of 2004. But in my rather layman understanding could not see any regulation prohibiting a retail store from selling schedule 0,1 or 2 drugs. Thus, there is no legal recourse it seems to make sure that such stores do not sell these over-the-counter drugs, at at the very least have a staff member that is at least semi-qualified to assist clients.

To cut a long story short, I believe that we need a consumer protection act and a consumer protection council that is empowered to look after the interests of the Namibian consumer. This will prevent stores from selling products to customers that will actually do more harm than good.

Milton Louw is the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. This column is written in his personal capacity as a consumer activist and the views expressed in this column are his own.

A sure way of getting nothing for something

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 2 July 2014)

At the end of every month I enjoy going to one of the big casinos in Windhoek and trying out my luck on the machines. Sometimes I win a little, but most of the time I lose. While sitting there though, I have noticed quite a few people who seem to lose every time that I am there. These gamblers are quite vocal when they lose and loudly claim that the casino management is purposefully preventing “their” machine from winning. They believe that after all the money they have spent, they should be getting a return on their investment.

The dictionary defines gambling as “takin a risky action in the hope of a desired result”. In the case of a gambling house, the owners are sure they will get their money as there is only a certain percentage that actually gets paid out in winnings. This percentage of winnings and other legal aspects are controlled by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism through the Casino and Gambling Houses Act 32 of 1994.  

Most consumers throughout the world are aware that giving a businesses a “free-hand” will lead to them maximising their profits while giving as little bit as possible back the client. Thus in the case of casino’s, governments must put in place legislation to ensure that the gambler has a least a certain percentage chance of winning. (Of interest in the Namibian law, is that the law states “The Minister may designate any person in the employment of the Public Service as an inspector for the purposes of this Act”. Thus, technically any government employee could act as an inspector?)

Now back to the role of government regulation.

If we take the definition of gambling and we look at various business models we will notice that very often a business idea is a “risky action in the hope of a desired result”. Take life insurance: The life insurance company is taking the risk that should you die, they must pay you a certain amount of money even if the amount you have paid in does not yet equal that amount. This means, the company is taking your money in the hope that you actually live long enough to pay them more that the amount that they pay out on your death. The insurance company is of course working with a profit motive to make money for the owners so the company must do everything in their power to reduce the risk to get their own desired result – namely you should stay alive as long as possible. If the company finds it difficult to reduce your chances of dying, they must find other methods of reducing their risk.

Insurance companies thus spend a lot of time in risk management and putting in place agreements that will be of maximum benefit to themselves without scaring away their customers. Therefore most insurance companies have mechanisms in place to reduce the amount they have to pay out in the case the “desired result” in not in their favour.

Here too governments have to play their role an regulate the market to ensure the customer on the street is being benefitted in the manner they expected – especially as that customer is now no longer among the living to ensure the contract is upheld by the life insurance company. To this end the Government has created the Namibian Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority (NAMFISA). It operates under the auspices of the Ministry of Finance, and it has no profit motive.

I believe that taking out life insurance is not a gamble but a risk reduction factor in my planning of my financial matters. As a consumer, I must hope that the government through NAMFISA will ensure that my interested are looked after even when I am in my grave. Looking at the present capability and track record of the regulator, I wonder if it will be there for me against the insurance company?

Milton Louw is the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. This column is written in his personal capacity as a consumer activist and the views expressed in this column are his own.

Let us sue for our money rights

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 25 June 2014)

Imagine your brother loses his job. He is a family man with two children and is now in need of a place to stay. You have a one-bedroomed flat at the back of your house that you normally rent out for N$ 2,000.00 a month. At the time he loses his job, you have no renters so you decide to give your brother and his family the chance to stay there. In addition, your brother and you agree that you will help him until such time as he gets another job and that when he gets a job, he will give you back the money that you have lost as an opportunity cost.

Now, while it is true that you are helping your brother, you are also having an “opportunity cost”.

Opportunity cost is the value of the next best choice that one gives up when making a decision. In basic terms, any decision that involves a choice between two or more opportunities has an opportunity cost. In the case above, the cost of helping your brother is going to mean a loss of N$ 2,000 to your monthly.

After three months, your brother got a job and is able to move back into a new place for him and his family. However, he has now been working for over a year and does not seem intent to repay your three months of “lost rent” amounting to N$ 6,000. What can you possibly do to get your money paid back?

Before we look at the possible solutions to this problem, let us explore another scenario.

You have purchased a second-hand vehicle and as part of the deal you exchanged your old car and paid an additional amount of N$ 20,000. After two months, the car you purchased breaks down and the vehicle is not reparable. You find out after some investigation that the dealer who sold the car to you had bought the car on auction after the car had been declared a write-off by an insurance company. When you speak to the dealer he insists that you took the vehicle “voetstoots” and that he can return your car in exchange for the broken car, BUT, he will keep the deposit of N$ 20,000 as his cost for the transaction. What can you possibly do to get your money paid back?

As can be seen from the two examples, you have done something in good faith, but the other person, either as an individual or a business, has not treated you fairly.

This is not a criminal case, but is referred to as a civil case. According to the dictionary, “A civil case is a lawsuit that usually deals with contracts and/or torts. Torts, generally speaking, are wrongful (negligent) acts that result in damage or injury.”

In the two examples above, the amounts are not over N$ 25,000 and will probably cost you more in lawyer’s fees. You may even end up getting your money but this would be an empty victory as the lawyer’s fees may exceed the amount you receive in compensation.

What we need in Namibia is a small claims court to assist the person on the street to be able to claim money that is too little to involve a lawyer.

A “Small Claims Court” is a court of law where ordinary people can handle their own cases. It is not necessary to have a lawyer (and their costs) as the forms are meant to be a kind of “do-it-yourself” where you fill in the blanks. The court has less formal and less complicated rules and procedures than the Magistrates Court.

I propose a small claims court be established where parties could settle their differences in cases up to the value of N$ 25,000. This can, and should, become part of a Consumer Protection Act.

Milton Louw is the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. This column is written in his personal capacity as a consumer activist and the views expressed in this column are his own.

Namibia’s form of capitalism must be reigned in

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 4 June 2014)

Recently a family member of mine woke up to the reality of how cold it really is this winter in the capital. At the end of April the City of Windhoek came to cut his power supply because of arrears in the family water and electricity account. The amount of arrears had accumulated over a period of twelve months as the family did not every time pay the full amount due. After around a year, the family was faced with just under N$3,000 they had to pay before electricity could be re-connected.

A friend in Windhoek recently came to the end of their rental contract of a year and presumed that the contract would automatically be renewed with a possible slight increase from her present N$ 5,000 per month. Imagine her surprise when the landlady sent her the new contract with the rental agreement now being N$ 6,200 per month. This is a month on month increase of N$ 1,200 or 25%. The friend and her family earns around N$ 12,000 in total and there is no way that they will be able to afford this sudden increase. The worst part is that the landlady is aware of this, but she already has a future renter that is willing to pay the proposed N$ 6,200 per month.

The price of chicken and milk has gone up since the government started protecting these industries as infant industries. This means that imports from outside the country are made more expensive by charging administrative levies on these products from outside and in this way allowing the local producer to increase their prices as the competitions prices are now higher for the end consumer.

Looking at these issues one has to come to the realisation that the Namibian form of capitalism has lost its course.

Now what is capitalism? Capitalism is the economic system in which trade, industry and the means of production are controlled by private individuals with the specific goal of making profits. Capitalism is also reliant on a political system that agrees with the principle of capitalism and actively encourages the economic aim of individual profit making.

In a perfect capitalist world, both parties to a transaction determine the prices at which assets, goods or services are exchanged. Namibia is not such a place!

In Namibia, most of the poor consumers have very little choice, if any, on what is available to buy and at what price. The location of consumer to the service outlets, and the lack of political action still leaves the consumer as a victim in a situation where they have no bargaining power, and no protection by the legislature (parliament), the executive (GRN) or the judiciary.

It is up to the consumer activists and the media to bring an end to this never ending road to poverty for the majority of Namibians. The economic situation of this country and its citizens was ruled by the apartheid policies before independence and this was one of the main factors for the people of the country wanting change. Now, twenty years after our Independence, the economic systems that are in place still do not reflect the needs of the poor. It is high time that the parliamentarians and the state takes cognisance of the need to protect consumers through the enactment of a Consumer Charter and relevant consumer protection measures.

Milton Louw is the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. This column is written in his personal capacity as a consumer activist and the views expressed in this column are his own.

What is a consumer activist?

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 11 June 2014)

Last week Wednesday, my first consumer column for New Era appeared and I was very pleased when a fiend indicated that he had seen my column. I was however very quickly deflated when he added that he had glanced through the article but was not actually sure what it was about. After some light questioning, I realised in fact that he had only read the heading and perhaps the first paragraph.

This led me to question (for at least five minutes anyway), why do I bother writing about consumer issues if not even my friends were reading it? Immediately though my common sense returned and reminded me that I am, and always will be, a consumer activist. This led me to the topic of today’s column, namely “What is a consumer activist?”

A consumer activist according to the dictionary meaning is “a person whose job is to protect the rights of customers, for example by giving advice, testing products, or trying to improve laws relating to the sale of goods.” This does explain what I do as an activist, except it is a non-paying job. That’s right, I do not get paid for trying to improve the laws relating to consumer affairs - in fact I do not even get paid for this weekly column. So what then motivates me and other like-minded individuals to propose boycotts, petition the government, write in the media and organise consumer interest groups on Facebook and elsewhere?

Personally speaking I consider the active role I play in consumer activism as a continuation of the active role I played in political activism during the Apartheid era in this country. There were “silly” laws during Apartheid such as black and coloured people were not allowed to buy white bread. That’s right. Not only were the people of this country prohibited from owning a business if they were not white, they were also prevented from buying white bread.

Since Independence, many Namibians have commented on the fact that the political struggle has been won but the economic struggle is not yet complete. Many of these same people are often times only referring to the ability of black business to enter the business environment and then be given opportunities that were denied to them under Apartheid. However, most of us forget to add that not only were the entrepreneurs and business people part of the struggle, but the consumer as a section of the population also played a crucial role.

The international consumer was roped into the struggle through getting the consumer to challenge the social order and help to change it through consumption choices which questioned their morality and indirect support of companies that did business with the Apartheid regimes in southern Africa.

After Independence however, many of our leaders in both politics and business have ensured that the laws have changed to accommodate the rising black business community and the employees in need of special regulations. There has also been a move to create new legislation through Affirmative Action (AA), Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), and now the New Equitable Economic Empowerment Framework (NEEEF) BUT nothing has come about in creating consumer protection laws to protect consumer from unscrupulous business practices, misleading advertising and profiteers (for example rent prices running out of control).

This is why I am a Consumer Activist - because I have the means and the talents to ensure the business practices and laws keep in mind the consumer - who is often the most ill-informed and least appreciated section of the community.

Milton Louw is the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. This column is written in his personal capacity as a consumer activist and the views expressed in this column are his own.

Forgive us our debts

(First Published in New Era Newspaper - 4 June 2014)

Is it possible for the Government of Namibia, through the Bank of Namibia, to wipe all our bad credit information off the blacklist? I do not want to have the debt written off, but rather just have every consumer in Namibia start with a clean slate as far as their credit record is concerned.

I believe this will help address the issue of access to credit for those Namibian that can afford credit. Many of these consumers may have paid their debts in full – and are in a position to afford credit – but their access is blocked by negative credit information still being stored on their credit record. This writing off of the “bad history” will ensure that consumers who can afford credit can be able to access it. It is presently difficult to get credit, it is expensive and this holds back growth. Access to a sustainable credit market is essential to all our development goals, especially Vision 2030.

The Bank of Namibia (BoN) announced on 29 August 2013 that the proposed draft regulations to regulate credit bureaus in Namibia are now open for public consultation. The BoN states “There has been recent speculation in the media around whether or not credit bureaus are illegal in Namibia. The Bank of Namibia’s view is that the existing credit bureaus in Namibia are legal entities registered in accordance with the relevant laws by the Ministry of Trade and Industry.

That means they are not illegal. What is missing in our legal system at the moment is a specific law regulating how these entities should manage the information under their care, and there is no centralized credit information system that allows banks and other lenders to know the total exposure per client and their credit history so as to avoid overextending of consumers.”

What is a credit bureau?

A credit bureau (sometimes called consumer reporting agency or credit reference agency) is a company that collects information from various sources and provides consumer credit information on individual consumers for a variety of uses. Credit information such as a person’s previous payment of loans or accounts is a powerful tool to predict their future behavior. Through the collection of such information lenders such as banks and micro-lenders can assess credit worthiness, the client’s ability to pay back a loan. This information can also affect the interest rate and other conditions of a loan.

Currently Namibian credit providers are under no obligations to supply information to credit bureaus. It is against that background that the proposed regulations will seeks to establish rights and obligations of credit bureaus to be registered and licensed by the Bank of Namibia. It is also proposed by the BoN that all credit bureaus are to have a centralized system. Such a system should have the capability of calculating total credit exposure per client, and requires that all credit providers are to supply information to all credit bureaus. The Regulations also provide clear guidelines pertaining to the kind of data to be collected, the period of time information can be kept (retention period) etc.

Consumer activists, community organisations and the media must keep this issue in the public eye to ensure that the credit bureau and the respective regulations are made in such a way to ensure fair credit reporting practices.

As a start, we must make sure that all credit bureaus adhere to the following minimum guidelines:

• Provide a consumer with information bureau’s files and to take steps to verify the accuracy of information disputed by a consumer;
• If negative information is removed as a result of a consumer's dispute, it may not be reinserted without notifying the consumer in writing;
• Credit bureaus may not retain negative information for an excessive period.

Property prices are too high in Namibia

This column first appeared in the Namibian newspaper on 29 November 2012

The inability of people to purchase a first time home is a common complaint heard everywhere in the country.
In this column I would like to look at problems created by property speculators and what can be done to assist in getting a bigger portion of our citizens to become homeowners.

One of the ways that speculators make money can be illustrated through the townhouse developments that have been springing up all over the country.  When the developer starts a project, most of the selling is done to a network of friends, family and other speculators who already own a property and gave the relationship with a bank to get the required financing fairly quickly and easily. Thus, sometime even before the first earth is turned, most of the houses in the development have already been sold. These purchasers however do not need to pay for the property until the actual development is completed. This means that they have only signed their name on the deed of sale and there is no need for any money at this point.

The property development can take a period of 18 to 24 months and as the developer reaches completion of the property, the speculators start advertising the property for sale. Most new homeowners are eager to purchase as they see the development is almost complete and wish to be the owner of a 'brand new' house. But there is a catch!

Prices go up all the time. Because the demand for houses is so high, the price of the property will be higher at the end of the construction, that is, 18 months after the start of the development.
So, if the speculator bought the house at a price for N$ 400 000 in January 2011, the property will have increased in value with as much as N$ 150 000 by November this year. So the new homeowner will now be buying the property from the speculator for the price of N$ 550 000. What makes it worse is that sometimes the dates of the transfer of property from the developer to the speculator, and the speculator to the new homeowner, are the same.

In other words, the speculator 'bought' the property by signing their name on the deed of sale and has not paid a single cent during this period on the property, but is still able to sell the property at a huge profit.

Taxing multiple home owners

We should put higher taxes on people who own more than one house in Namibia. By forcing property owners who hold land on speculation to sell or rent out for what they can get, a tax on land values tends to increase the competition between owners, and will lead to the reduction of the price of land.

One way of doing this is to introduce a Capital Gains Tax, in other words a tax when you make a profit on the sale of a property or other asset. This is done in many countries all over the world and after introduction has seen house prices decrease by as much as 30 percent as demand by property speculators drops.
This tax will not affect your primary residence provided that your property is smaller than a pre-determined size (for example two hectares) and the profit you make is less than a certain amount (for example N$ 500 000). If you are a homeowner having a second property or a holiday home, you will taxed on the profit you make when selling the other property. In addition, the government should make capital gains tax applicable on all properties registered in the name of close corporations, trusts and companies.

As long as Namibians lack ownership of property they will have very little (or no) interest in their community. Home ownership has a positive impact on families, communities and Namibia's economy as private ownership of property is fundamental to both our freedom and our prosperity in the future.

Smart Toilet information – good or bad idea?

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine May 2013)

Recently there was an article in an international publication about “smart toilets” being installed by municipal authorities of Toronto, Canada. The toilets were being installed at the city’s convention centre, the equivalent of our Windhoek Showgrounds. The purpose of installing the toilets is to allow them to analyse the data collected from the toilet.

When I heard about it, my first question had to be why? The second issue that came to mind is that there is no more privacy if I should use a public smart toilet.

(As I read further in the article, it turned out that the “smart toilets” was actually a publicity stunt.)

But let us look a little bit deeper at what the company was actually claiming to do. The fake company is called Quantified Toilets and they claimed to have installed sensors in the Toronto Convention centre and other public venues that would automatically analyse “deposits” in the toilets to detect a person’s gender, drug and alcohol levels, pregnancy status, sexually-transmitted infection status, and “the smell factor”.

The company (remember it is a fake business”), even put up signs in the bathrooms that read “Behavior at these toilets is being recorded for analysis.”

The company also created an accompanying website featured that featured a live stream of toilet data being collected in real time.

The idea of “smart toilets” is not actually a new idea. The IT company INTEL, has done a survey in the United States of America and found that “70% of people said they would be willing to share their smart toilet data if it led …. to lower medical costs”

The article however went on to explain why the idea of “smart toilets” is not a good idea. It was this part of the article that struck me most as a consumer activist.

What if the Government of Namibia (GRN) or a private company installs “smart toilets” and does not leave you with any option on whether your private information is collected or not. (In other words it is not your choice – there is no opt-out option.) Furthermore, it must be a worry that personal health data that is NOT being collected for use by a doctor. Imagine this was shared with an insurance company for example?

Let us look at some of the scenarios sketched in the article:

·         At a convention or concert, an organization could determine whether attendees have high rates of pregnant women with positive drug or alcohol tests, then use that knowledge to target public health messages to the demographic.

·         In stadiums, an organization could see which sections had higher blood alcohol levels, and even the peak levels during the game.  They could market more beer to that section—or make it harder for people in that section to buy drinks. They might even sell this data to beer vendors willing to pay for such demographic information.

·         Other ideas from the Quantified Toilets website: “We use this data to streamline cleaning crew schedules, inform municipalities of the usage of resources, and help buildings and cities plan for healthier and happier citizens.”

Now imagine your employer could get hold of this kind of data. The boss will be able to know which drugs you are taking, check to see if you show up at work drunk or even know which female employees are expecting babies.

As users of “smart phones” we already use a lot of applications to track our movements, pictures we take, where we eat meals, etc,. but there’s a serious line that must be drawn between the “quantified self movement”—in which people record as much personal metadata as possible—and public monitoring of our data. 

The author of the article ended his piece with the following paragraphs:

Sensors of all types are easily connected to the Internet. They can collect vast amounts of data, which can then be shared widely. As citizens, we don’t always know what data is being collected, who can access it, or how it will be used. Even seemingly secure networks can be comprised. 

We should be leading conversations about the legal privacy protections we need to establish for what once seemed to be private activities. In a data-rich connected world, even the most intimate spaces are becoming public.

The original article can be found at http://finance.yahoo.com/news/toilet-hoax-tell-us-future-223000900.html

Sugar is our Enemy

First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine April 2013)

There is a new documentary called FED UP, that takes a look at the global problem of obesity and obesity-related diseases (In other words “Why are humans fat?”). Some years back the first consumer oriented documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, made waves and created awareness of the issue surrounding climate change. In, FED UP, the filmmakers continue with this tradition with a hard-hitting challenge over the misconceptions (and food industry-sponsored misinformation) about diet and exercise, good and bad calories, fat genes and lifestyle.

One of the biggest misconceptions about sugar is addressed in the film. According to the film’s scientific consultant Robert Lustig, a neuroendocrinologist, author and president of the Institute for Responsible Nutrition, “when it comes to obesity, fat may not be our friend but it’s not the enemy that sugar is.” This view is gathering support from doctors all across the world.

To further understand this issue, we need to look at statistics in the United State of America (USA) as there is very little first-hand historical information available in Namibia. In the USA, 17% of children and young people aged between two and nineteen are considered obese. Another study predicts that today’s American children will lead shorter lives than their parents. This must be very scary, and should be considered in the Namibian context because we are starting to follow the same eating habits of these developed nations.

However, we must be careful in blaming our problems on obesity nor fat. “The food industry wants you to focus on three falsehoods that keep it from facing issues of culpability. One, it’s about obesity. Two, a calorie is a calorie. Three, it’s about personal responsibility,” according to Lustig.

“If obesity was the issue, metabolic illnesses that typically show up in the obese would not be showing up at rates found in the normal-weight population. More than half the populations of the US and UK are experiencing effects normally associated with obesity. If more than half the population has problems, it can’t be a behaviour issue. It must be an exposure problem. And that exposure is to sugar.”

The film further goes on and claims that fast-food chains (Wipmy, Nando’s, to name a few Namibian brands) and the makers of processed foods such as dairy and meat, have added more sugar to “low fat” foods to make them more appetizing and tasty. Thus the producers are making “healthy foods” appear less dangerous and we tend to eat more of them because of their perceived “healthiness”.

In many societies, nutrition problems are most often associated with low-income groups, but this “sugary problem” is affecting all levels of society. In the film, they suggest that big business is poisoning us with food marketed under the disguise of health benefits.

One of these diseases, early-onset diabetes which is associated with exposure to cane sugar and corn syrup, was virtually unknown a few years ago. At the present rate approximately one in three Americans will have diabetes by 2050. “Obesity costs very little and is not dangerous in and of itself,” says Lustig, who works with the UK’s Action on Sugar campaign. “But diabetes costs a whole lot in terms of social evolution, decreased productivity, medical and pharmaceutical costs, and death.”

The film-makers say it is not in the interest of food, beverage or pharmaceutical companies to reduce sugar content. “It’s too profitable,” says Lustig. The pharmaceutical industry talks of diabetes treatment, not prevention. “The food industry makes a disease and the pharmaceutical industry treats it. They make out like bandits while the rest of us are being taken to the cleaners.”

One of the important points that Lustig makes is that: “Food producers are going to have to be forced. There’s only one group that can force them, and that’s the government. There’s one group that can force the government, and that’s the people.”

Truly inspirational words for the consumer groups and Consumer News Namibia Magazine.

Intellectual Property Rights and how it affects the consumer

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine April 2013)

In many areas of business today, the term Intellectual Property (IP) is being used to justify the higher price of a product or service – and the prevention of competing businesses being able to provide the same product or service. This means a competing business may not sell the product or service at all – even if it would mean a cheaper cost to the consumer. However, it is important that intellectual property rights protection be encouraged in society to ensure that better inventions, products or services are being created.

Wikipedia defines IP as:

Intellectual property (IP) rights are the legally recognized exclusive rights to creations of the mind. Under intellectual property law, owners are granted certain exclusive rights to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions; and words, phrases, symbols, and designs. Common types of intellectual property rights include copyright, trademarks, patents, industrial design rights, trade dress, and in some jurisdictions trade secrets.

As a consumer, we all want to be able to buy a product for a cheaper price, but we do not want to compromise on the quality of the product, or even worse use a cheaper product that might actual cause us physical harm. It is thus clear that there must be a point of equality where the IP holder gets a decent return for the investment of their idea or invention compared to the price the consumer has to pay for such a product or service.

To understand this concept better, let us examine each type of right that is referred to:

·         Copyright

Copyright gives the creator of an original work the chance to receive payment for their work and allow them to financially support themselves through this work. This is often granted to visual and audio works such as music, books, paintings, etc. Copyright is recognized without any formal registration in most countries – as long as the work is in a completed form.

·         Trademarks

A trademark is sign, design or expression that identifies products or services from a specific source. International examples include Coca Cola, Facebook and Toyota. In Namibia, an example is the trademark of MTC which is fully written out as Mobile Telecommunications Limited. Trademarks allow the consumer to be assured that a specific product or service does in fact originate from the company whose trademark is used.

·         Patents

A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a country to an inventor for a limited period of time in exchange for detailed public disclosure of an invention. The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent others from making, using, selling, importing, or distributing a patented invention without permission.

·         Industrial Design

An industrial design right protects the visual design of objects that are not purely practical or functional. It can consist of the creation of a shape, configuration or composition of pattern or color, or combination of pattern and color in three-dimensional form containing artistic value. An industrial design can be a two- or three-dimensional pattern used to produce a product, industrial commodity or handicraft. In Namibia, local handicrafts can qualify for industrial design rights.

·         Trade Dress

This refers to characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging that signify the source of the product to consumers. Examples are the Team Namibia products that carry the Team Namibia logo.

In Namibia, the government, business community, civil society and the consumer needs to define how to ensure that intellectual property rights are protected (and encouraged) while not allowing exploitation of the consumer.



Milton Louw is a consumer activist and writer. He is presently the IT Project Coordinator at the Electoral Commission of Namibia. The opinions expressed in this article are purely his own.

Imagine life without debt!

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine April 2013)

“Debt is like a disease that can enable us from living a happy and normal life by taking control over our lives. Most of us don't even know how we end up in the situation we are in. Buying everything we own with credit has become our culture. But don't let debt control your life any more. You can take over your life again. Imagine life without debt!”

Is it true? Can a person do things in life without using getting into a debt trap? YES. The problem is not about using debt or cash, but rather about financial management and making sure you keep yourself out of trouble and ensure you don’t worry too much about the level of credit you have or are using.

Remember the following are tips only – you must find the ones that work best for your and apply them to your life.

1. Don’t get into debt
Use cash wherever you can and do not take out any debt except for a motor vehicle or a house.
2. Spend less money than what you earn (obvious but needs to be said)
3. Write down all your liabilities so that you can see what is the amount of money you owe the world. This should be very motivational if you keep a record of this amount as you start paying it off.
4. Cut up your credit cards – all your clothing accounts, etc. should rather be on a cash buy basis
5. Avoid eating out – if possible cook at home and you will save a lot – you can splurge on a cookbook that can help make your meals a little more interesting too.
6. If you go out, visit friends and find things to do that is not expensive – going to the dam, or the park, visiting a museum, etc.
7. Plan for future expenses now.
8. Make a budget – and stick to it
9. Speak to your spouse or partner about both your spending habits – it takes both of you working together to reach your goals
10. Be realistic – the debt will not go away overnight. The same time it took to accumulate the debt is about the time you will need to pay it off
11. Eliminate some things – look hard at the things you spend your monthly budget on – and cut some of them out. This might be your MNET subscription or the gym membership that you never use?
12. STOP borrowing money – every cent borrowed during the month feels like twice the amount when you have to repay it. This is especially true if you are using a cash loan facility.
13. Turn off your television – this way the adverts will not tempt you.

Number thirteen was thrown in to make you laugh – but the advice of not letting temptation ruin your budget is true. Don’t take those pamphlets that the jewelry or clothing store gives out. Don’t open the catalogues they send in the mail – all of it is aimed at making you spend more.

Fuel Card debate

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine April 2013)

On 12 April 2010, the Bank of Namibia announced that “..As part the Namibian payment system reform initiative of which the implementation of the local card switch, NAMSWITCH, has been one of the milestones, the Namibian banking industry resolved to discontinue petrol cards in Namibia in the near future. The public will instead be allowed to purchase fuel with internationally accepted debit and credit cards. The Payment Association of Namibia (PAN) wishes to inform the public that they can use their debit and credit cards to purchase fuel at Filling Stations.

These developments are good steps in the right direction for consumers, for fuel retailers, and for the country as a whole. The use of broader range of payment instruments at Fuel Stations provide consumers with choices of which payment instrument to use and as such eliminate cash based transactions in favour of a more convenient, secure and cost-effective method of payment. “

At the time the announcement was made, it was understood by consumer groups to be a good thing as it would widen the choices of payment methods by consumers. For once it seemed that the banking industry was thinking of the consumer first.

Two years down the line and the Bank of Namibia informed the public that “..that fuel cards (Garage and Petro) will no longer be accepted  as a legal tender after 28 February 2014.  After this date clients will be able to purchase fuel with cash, debit or credit cards. Clients should note that fuel stations are not obliged to accept debit or credit cards for purchases.”  

It was that last sentence that had some of the consumer groups contact the Association of Service Station Owners (ASSO). After all, why would a fuel station refuse to get paid for fuel?

The ASSO then pointed out that when using a debit or a credit card, one and a half percent goes to the bank, which it takes from the 77 cents profit. Further, service stations may not charge a client any surcharge fee for a point-of-sale transaction for fuel with a credit or debit card. In fact, banks have asked its clients to contact them should a service station charge an additional fee for the transaction.

Since the 28^th of February 2014, many fuel stations are turning away all customers that want to use cards to purchase fuel. This has led to many consumer now having to carry the cash around in their pockets for this vital product needed in our daily lives.

So what must be done? The Bank of Namibia and the Payments Association of Namibia (PAN) assured the public in April 2010 that “…these developments are good steps in the right direction for consumers, for fuel retailers, and for the country as a whole.”

This is not the case! Consumers and fuel retailers are being inconvenienced, and these measures also increase the profits of the bankers. They – the bankers - have changed the terms and conditions of how we pay and increased their profit margin while pretending that this is to our benefit.

It is clear that the Namibia Competition Commission (NCC) must become involved in this debate. Consumer groups welcome the fact that the NCC is “highly concerned” that the decision has indeed led to constraining consumers in their method of choice to settle an applicable transaction.

Consumer groups mobilise to demand phone rights for 7 billion users

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine April 2013)

Consumers International (CI), the global federation of 250 consumer groups, published its Consumer Agenda for Fair Mobile Services ahead of World Consumer Rights Day (WCRD) on Saturday 15 March 2014.

In the run up to 15 March, consumer groups from around the world made a call on mobile phone service providers to demand better services for the 7 billion mobile users across the globe. Mobile rip offs are commonplace – from holidaymakers being stung by four figure roaming bills abroad, to customers tricked into paying to receive text messages.

With smartphones set to function as a remote control for more and more aspects of our lives, consumer groups believe now is the time to ensure big mobile companies are held to account for unfair, substandard services.

In consultation with consumer groups around the world, CI drew up a Consumer Agenda for Fair Mobile Services, which outlines what the consumer rights movement wants to see changed. This includes demands that telecom companies:

• provide consumers with access to an affordable, reliable service

• provide consumers with fair contracts explained in clear, complete and accessible language

• provide consumers with fair and transparent billing

• provide consumers with security and power over their own information, and

• listen and respond to consumer complaints.

CI is planning to deliver this message to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) - the UN body responsible for setting standards in the industry - ahead of the ITU World Telecommunications Development Conference in early April.

Amanda Long, Consumers International Director General says:

“Mobile phones are an everyday part of the lives of billions of people. From social interaction, and digital identity; to banking and e-commerce: they have become essential to the way we live, spend, connect and express ourselves.

“But consumers the world over complain about the service they receive from telecom providers. From West Africa, to Asia Pacific; Europe, to South America - our member groups are telling us that connection reliability, unfair contracts, unclear billing, poor customer services and concerns over data privacy are regular issues for consumers. It’s time the international telecom providers answer the call for action.”

Namibia is no exception. The telecommunications industry does not have a service of culture and now that it all telephonic services fall under one company (Namibia Post and Telecom Holdings), competitiveness is not a driving force for change.

The Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN) is responsible for regulating the telecommunication services and networks, broadcasting services, postal services and the use and allocation of radio spectrum. Consumer Protection and Advocacy forms an integral part of CRAN's mandate. CRAN is supposed to ensure that consumers receive the full benefits of competitive electronic communication services and are protected from any exploitation or abuse. A streamlined complaints handling system in accordance with the Act has been put in place, but no consumer group has yet evaluated the process or had access to reports on the internal handling of the complaints received by the authority.

Note: Leo was purchased by Telecom and is now renamed TN Mobile. Telecom and the Post Office are 100% owned by Namibia Post and Telecom Holdings (NPTH). MTC is 66% owned by NPTH.

My Do and Get Book

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine March 2013)

The Bank Windhoek group of companies has been supporting entrepreneurial development among children of school going age through the Bank Windhoek BizzKids competition. Last year, the winners were Keanu da Silva (13) and Keyat da Silva (11) trading as “Team D” from Eldorado Secondary School and M H Greeff Primary School. The business product they created was the “My Do and Get Book”. In basic terms, the two brothers sold work plans for children to do household chores to teach them to be responsible and at the same time earn pocket money for household chores done.

Wikipedia explains “pocket money” as follows: An allowance is an amount of money given or allotted usually at regular intervals for a specific purpose. In the context of children, parents may provide an allowance (British English: pocket money) to their child for their miscellaneous personal spending.

The person providing the allowance is usually trying to control how or when money is spent by the recipient so that it meets the aims of the person providing the money. For example an allowance by a parent might be motivated to teach the child money management and may be unconditional or be tied to completion of chores or achievement of specific grades

As a consumer activist the business idea of the brothers really caught my attention. First, it explains the importance of children being given the responsibility of doing things around the house as part of their contribution. Secondly, it adds the element of understanding the value of these chores in terms of earnings. These earnings (points based system) are converted into an agreed amount in Namibian dollars that the child can receive at the end of every month as their allowance. Thirdly, it leaves a long lasting experience for the child to prepare them for the “real” world where nothing in life is free.

The book is a daily reminder (when used correctly) about what is responsibility while reminding the child of the rewards due for the work done. This moral lesson is reinforced by the weekly checking of both chores and points awarded. At the end of the book, it also allows for a balancing to be done of both parties contribution to the work programme outlined in advance.

The business idea has now been formalized and the duo, together with their parents is shopping around to find a corporate sponsor. I hope that corporate sponsors are open to this idea, and link it to other products to also include saving and banking of these allowances.

Milton Louw is a Namibian consumer activist and is not affiliated to the business “My Do and Get Book” in any way or form.

Consumer Rights Day 15 March 2014

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine March 2013)

World Consumer Rights Day (WCRD) was established on 15 March 1983 to promote consumer rights around the world. For WCRD in 2014, consumer organisations around the world are highlighting the consumer issues that are undermining and frustrating the success of mobile phone services.

The international consumer body, Consumers International (CI) will be launching a new Consumer Agenda for Fair Mobile Services. The agenda sets out the issues that most effect consumers including the need for access to a reliable service, the security of their data and fair contracts and billing.

CI will submit the Agenda to the World Telecommunications Development Conference, held by the International Telecommunications Union, where they will be calling on phone regulators and companies to take action to stop these issues undermining the success of this new technology.

Consumer Agenda for Fair Mobile Services addresses the issues that affect mobile consumers across the world and Namibia is no exception. Some of the issues that we need to address globally are:

1.       Provide consumers with access to an affordable, reliable service

Consumers want to be able to have access to affordable mobile services in order to communicate and to access information. It is only reasonable that they then expect those services to be consistent and of a high quality without drop outs in service.

2.       Provide consumers with fair contracts explained in clear, complete and accessible language

Consumers often feel cheated by their mobile provider, either because of unfair contract terms and conditions or because they didn’t understand what they had signed. Telecom providers should always provide consumers with fair contracts with all relevant information explained clearly so that consumers can exercise their right to make informed choices.

3.       Provide consumers with fair and transparent billing

Consumers shouldn’t be billed for services they didn’t request. We demand fairness and transparency in our bills, and protection from billing fraud.

4.       Provide consumers with security and power over their own information

Telecoms providers and regulators alike must protect the personal data that consumers give up in order to use mobile services. Whilst giving consent to use personal data can enhance the experience of using a mobile phone, it can also compromise the consumer’s right to safety. Consumers must be able to set the terms of how this data is used.

5.       Listen and respond to consumer complaints

Telecom providers should have effective complaints systems and if consumers are not satisfied there should be redress mechanisms to ensure a fair outcome. We must be able to penalise providers for abusive and unjust business practices.

Conclusion – Namibia’s Consumer Programme

For 2014 the Namibia Consumer Protection Group (NCPG) will be meeting with the Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN), Telecom Namibia and MTC to discuss the Consumer Rights Charter and how the present laws and regulations might not be meeting the needs of the Namibian consumer. Issues to be addressed include

a.       the lack of progress on number portability (keeping your own number no matter who the service supplier is);

b.      data services not up to advertised standards; and

c.       complaint procedure (redress for service gaps).

Any consumer which wants to have more information about these and other consumer issues can contact email address: miltonlouw@gmail.com

Service culture in Namibia

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine March 2013)

I have been plagued in the past few weeks with the bad level of service I received from companies around Namibia. It has gone from a restaurant which brought the starters (oysters) twenty minutes after the main course had arrived, (the main course was a medium-done steak and should have taken much longer than shelling oysters), to a telephone call to a bank to request their latest home loan rates and I was informed that the person dealing with that type of enquiry is not answering their phone.

This led me to look again at what service is, and more importantly how do we go about creating a “service culture” in the country.

Allow me to first define the words Service and Culture.

For me the word SERVICE is “performing work for someone else”. Culture is defined as the “total inherited ideas, beliefs, values, and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action.”

Looking at these meanings we look at the key messages to found within these two words, namely

• Inherited
•  Shared
• Values
• Knowledge
• Perform work for someone else

This is the message we need to make part of our normal everyday lives. As Namibians we must strive to implant a Service Culture as a “lasting inheritance of shared wisdom.” This working together will make the end result far greater than the sum of individual contributions.

So how do you become part of creating this Service Culture? Or more importantly, why do you as a customer also have to play a part in encouraging the Service Culture.

During Apartheid, one of the important weapons used by activists was the “consumer boycott”.  A Consumer boycott means a boycott adopted by consumers of both product and services to express their displeasure with the seller, manufacturer, or provider. Sometimes, customers may refuse to purchase a particular product in order to show their dissatisfaction to the excessive price or offensive action of a particular manufacturer or producer.

At this point is also important to balance what part the Service Culture plays from the employees to us as customers, and how much of the Service Culture is influenced by the relationship between the employer and their employees.

So, if a company or service supplier provides me with employees who treat me badly or with slow service, I must differentiate between the service being done to me (is it personal) or is it a business culture within that business.

I have looked again at the service provided to me by the restaurant in my opening paragraph. This same restaurant was in the news less than two days later as the owner had fired a staff member for eating leftover food. For those of you who work in the hospitality industry, you know how unappetizing the food at your own workplace becomes, what still to say of the leftovers you see being thrown every day? Looking more closely at the restaurant and the way the owners are reported to treat their workers, I will boycott such a business until they improve their treatment of their employees – which will surely bring about an improved customer service.

Sometimes bad service must lead to a moral purchasing decision by a consumer. Yes, that means I will rather go without your product or service until such time as the relationship between employer, employee and myself becomes something worthy and part of our shared Namibian Service Culture.

Read Before You Buy

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine January 2013)

When was the last time you read the product description or spent time understanding the labeling of a product you have purchased? How many times have you accepted that the product meets your needs without actually understanding what the product is composed of? Unless you have a specific allergy or irritation that is caused by a product, most of us would purchase without taking time to look at the specific ingredients of the product.

Recently, I was advised to take an energy supplement as I am working up till 10 hours a day, seven days a week. A friend gave me an energy supplement of Bioplus and swore that this would “energise” me and provide that needed boost. (It should be noted that the Bioplus sachets can be bought at most supermarkets, small shop or even a service station shop and are displayed quite prominently.) After about two weeks of taking these energisers on an almost daily basis, I went on Christmas leave and felt I would not need the drinks any more. After a day of two of not using the sachets I developed a craving to at least buy a sachet or two.

Normally, I am able to handle any craving by just ignoring it until it goes away. However, the feeling of wanting to have a sachet stayed with me for about a week.  After the week had passed I happened to be passing a store where the sachets were displayed – and having time on my hands – and took a chance to look more closely at what are the ingredients of the Bioplus sachets. Great was my surprise to read that each sachet has its main ingredient Alcohol at 10% of the volume.

That means the sachet of Bioplus has 10% of volume consisting of alcohol which puts it at more than twice the strength of a beer. The sachets I had been drinking without thought of a consequence was in fact putting me in danger of been drunk at work, or even more dangerous could cause me to have been over the legal limit of alcohol in my body if I had been caught driving.

I am sure that no police officer in the country (or my Boss for that matter) would believe that I had become drunk from drinking an energy drink.

As a consumer activist I always pride myself on being a “active consumer” in that I pay attention to what a product contains, but realized how quickly I had bought into the product myth that the Bioplus sachet would give me more energy. Looking back, I wonder if I really had more energy, or did the alcohol mislead me into believing that I had more energy while all it had done was give me a drunken buzz?

For myself, I will be checking the products I purchase a lot more closely, until the next time I buy into “the feel good factor”.

Not just food security – but also food safety

(First appeared in Consumer News Namibia Magazine January 2013)

Namibia is facing one of the worst droughts in the past three decades.  The Office of the Prime Minister, in March 2013, budgeted to assist about 331 000 people in communal areas that are classified as food insecure. In the meantime that amount has ballooned to almost 560 000 by December of the same year. The areas affected by the drought were mainly communal (rural) areas and resettled farms. Through the Office of the Prime Minister’s relief programme the government has distributed maize, beans, tinned fish as well as game meat.

During this period, most of the development partners have focused on poverty or food security, but very few have emphasized the need for food safety. Consumer organisations (in Namibia and abroad), also emphasize food safety when discussing food security, as this is the assurance that eating something will not damage your health.  This is an absolutely fundamental requirement, and as important as having enough food to eat.

According to Wikipedia:
“Food safety is a scientific discipline describing handling, preparation, and storage of food in ways that prevent foodborne illness. This includes a number of routines that should be followed to avoid potentially severe health hazards. The tracks within this line of thought are safety between industry and the market and then between the market and the consumer. In considering industry to market practices, food safety considerations include the origins of food including the practices relating to food labeling, food hygiene, food additives and pesticide residues, as well as policies on biotechnology and food and guidelines for the management of governmental import and export inspection and certification systems for foods. In considering market to consumer practices, the usual thought is that food ought to be safe in the market and the concern is safe delivery and preparation of the food for the consumer.”

The food safety challenges facing Namibia are still many. They include a lack of standards and policies, uncoordinated or perhaps even disjointed governance between organisations, inadequate testing facilities (though the Government is addressing this), lack of trained staff, porous borders with our neighbours and an absence of enforcement of the rules regarding food safety.

Perhaps it is time to asses our ability to not only react to a drought and the provision of food, but also include an element of food safety to ensure that all the people in the country are able to eat something that will not damage their health. After all the first two components of the consumer rights charter worldwide are the right to satisfaction of basic needs and the right to safety.

Milton Louw is a consumer activist and author. The opinions in this article are solely his own and in his personal capacity.