Equality does not mean justice

(First appeared in New Era 4 February 2015)

THE birth of our son has brought us a lot of pleasure, but also added to our responsibilities, and worries for what the future will bring. At the same time my father is reaching pensionable age and I have been assisting him in ensuring his financial security. This has meant looking at both the financial services that we must put in place for our children, as well as examining the services that my father had planned. These include how we manage banking, pension funds, savings accounts, medical and hospital cover as well as purchasing larger items like a motor vehicle and a house on credit. All these products and services are meant to ensure that we can sleep more peacefully at night because we have the knowledge and ability to access them.

The question remains though at the back of my head, “What if these services were not available to me?” And the even larger question looms, “What about my fellow consumers who struggle to get the same access to allow them to sleep peacefully at night?”

The issue of access to financial services and products is referred to as “financial inclusion”. This term is often used by the Bank of Namibia, Namfisa, Ministry of Finance and the Financial Literacy Initiative (FLI) to encourage the providers of these services to widen the net to allow more “inclusion”.  When looking at financial inclusion, I prefer to define what services consumers are being excluded from so that we can identify what should be addressed. Very often the exclusion of consumers to financial services include: a) insufficient income; b) high risk of non-payment; c) discrimination (on the basis of race, marital status, etc.); d) lack of information – both by the clients and by the service providers; e) weak contract enforcement by the courts; f) product features – use of technical terms for example that are not fully understood; and g) price barriers due to market imperfections.

Thus financial inclusion means minimising or removing financial exclusion arising from market or government failures. Some supporters of financial inclusion want to see a situation where banks do not even charge a fee when a client deposits money for safe-keeping.
However, one of our regular readers who is a financial advisor warns of the expectations that these services should be provided at no cost. “Although technology has advanced so much that we can reduce costs significantly, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Costs will just be claimed somewhere else.”

Financial service providers use the issues mentioned to design their products and services and this (unfortunately) leads to the best services and products being offered to the more well-off clients. The people who need these services are thus being penalised twice – on the availability of the service and the extra high cost they must pay to make use of the service. The financial providers however insist that all clients have equal access to their services.

When all is said and done, peace of mind is essential to all Namibians. We as the consumers, and government and service providers need to take ownership and have justness in solutions for all consumers. After all is said and done, we cannot continue with the belief that “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

Honour thou Elders that thou days may be long

(First appeared in New Era 28 January 2015)

The past week my father called me from South Africa to come and assist him with his pension pay-outs he has to receive now that he has turned 65. My father was born during the apartheid era (in Walvis Bay) and had completed his schooling in the Cape Province of South Africa. After school and a few years I the private sector, he had chosen the army as a career and was enlisted in the South Africa Coloured Corps. This was his job and not just the normal two years stint (conscription) that was expected of every citizen. He spent several years serving in the army, including doing duty in the northern parts of the then South West Africa.

When I grew of age (being 18), there were many arguments in our house as I was an active member of the student organisations protesting against the South African occupation of Namibia. Having been born in Windhoek, I feel I am a citizen of Namibia even though my father felt he was on the side of the South Africans.

After Independence, it took a few years for the arguments about politics to eventually also accept reconciliation as a reality. For me the turning point was in 2004 when my father was declared disabled and unfit to continue employment. It was at that time that the Bible’s commandment of “Honour thou Mother and thou Father that thou days may be long” really struck me.

At that time in 2004, my father was fighting the banking system that refused to accept his disability and were threatening to auction his house as he was not able pay his mortgage. This despite the fact that he had an insurance policy (taken out by the bank) that was supposed to cover him in the eventuality of death or disability. The bank in question insisted that his disability was a “previous condition” and thus not covered by the policy. After a year-long battle with me at his side, we were able force the bank (yes, we had to force them to meet their obligation) to accept the medical reports of experts and have the insurance policy pay off his mortgage.

This lesson of what businesses do to avoid giving satisfaction to their customers (and thus making more profits) is what led me to becoming the consumer activist I am today.

As consumers we have started to have culture of “consumer social responsibility” towards our elderly as we willingly allow pensioners, pregnant women and people with disabilities to be served first when there are queues.

I would like to see our businesses in Namibia also take this attitude and provide their corporate social responsibility through discounted prices for the elderly, and not only on groceries, but also public transport, electricity, water and telecommunications. Would it not be wonderful if our elderly could receive up to 50% discount on their water and electricity and perhaps even completed amnesty from paying rates and taxes to the local authorities? It would be gladdening to my heart (and, according to the Bible, add years to my life) if the government owned enterprises would also provide a minimum number f credits or products and services to the elderly as a way of honouring for their many years of service to our beautiful, peaceful country? These state-owned enterprises and agencies include MTC, Telecom, Namwater, Nampower and even the local supplier of Coca-Cola, Namibia Beverages to name but a few.

On this topic, would it also not be a sign of a mature country to provide sufficiently for our elderly with a state pension of at least N$ 1,200 per month? If we give this a little thought, perhaps we too can honour our mothers and fathers that our days on earth might be long.

#MTC pay back the money

(This first appeared in the New Era of 14 January 2015)

THERE is a quote I like to use when giving consumers advice, “He who buys what he does not need steals from himself.” This advice is normally given before the festive season to remind others (and my own family) that no matter how tempting the advertisement is of a product, always ask yourself whether the product has any use in your life.

I can show you more than a cupboard full of things that I have bought over the years that I have never used. This advice is of course only usable if you are the one doing the buying – sometimes you receive a gift and you smile and say thank you without knowing whether you will ever use the gift in question. I still have a Bart Simpson tie that I will never wear.

When I became a consumer activist I noticed how consumers are misled through advertising (or the savvier word “promotion”) to purchase something they do not need and then have no recourse to getting their money refunded. This has led to many countries introducing a “cooling-off period” – a period of time during which the consumer may cancel a purchase. In this way the purchase of (especially) expensive items like houses and vehicles can be cancelled if the buyer becomes aware that they may have bitten off more than they can chew. This is also often the case when in the shop and the salesperson convinces you of the product they are selling rather than of the product you need.

Last month I did not buy SuperAweh airtime from MTC as I usually do when at work. My week of special phone call prices had expired but then I received a message from MTC that I was being charged N$2.00 for “future data usage”. I do not need data for my cellular as I have a laptop and unlimited 4G access and I thought this is rather presumptuous. I was rather angry, as “I had just bought what I do not need” and was stealing from myself.

Rather than steal from myself, I activated the SuperAweh package and thought nothing more about it. A week later, MTC sent another SMS informing me that my SuperAweh would expire and I should renew it. However, this expiry happened at midnight of the day indicated and, lo and behold, I found myself stealing another N$2.00 from myself at exactly 2 seconds past midnight.

Upon enquiry on social media I became aware that I was not the only consumer stealing from themselves. The worst case was a company that owned a fleet of cars that were using tracking devices over the cellular network. These devices were installed securely within the vehicles and this was done purposefully to prevent thieves from being able to remove the devices.

This company with a fleet of over 50 trackers now find themselves stealing over a N$100.00 a day for data usage – because MTC has made it the responsibility of the user to opt out of the promotion.

The regulator, the Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN), received numerous consumer complaints during this period and reacted very quickly. In the press release CRAN clearly states that “the mandatory imposition of this promotional tariff and placing an obligation on the consumer to cancel the participation in a promotion, which the consumer has not initially subscribed to, is not in line with the provisions of Section 79 of the Communications Act and can therefore not be supported by CRAN”.

Aha! I was not buying something I did not need, but rather MTC was charging me for a service I did not need.

Neither a borrower nor a lender be

(This first appeared in the New Era of 14 January 2015)

The headline for this week’s column is borrowed from a soliloquy by Polonius in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet where Polonius is giving advice to his son Laertes before Laertes heads back to school.

“Neither a borrower nor a lender be, for loan oft loses both itself and friend, and borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.”

The past month I took my annual leave and I was fortunate to have it coincide with the birth of my son. I would strongly urge fathers (and lawmakers take note) to be there for your child's first few weeks or even months. It makes you appreciate the mother more, and sharing the sleepless nights and stomach cramps does wonders for your relationship. The best part must be the smiles you get for no apparent reason while you child falls asleep in your arms. This is the best investment any father can give and I trust the “return on your investment” will be worthwhile in the long run.

While on leave I noticed a public notice in the newspaper placed by the Namibia Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority (NAMFISA). In the advert, NAMFISA notified all Hire Purchase Outlets and Credit Grantors that the maximum finance charges as per the Usury Act of 1968 is 15.60 percent per annum. NAMFISA has as one of its objectives the protection of consumers of financial services and in this regard administers the Usury Act.

Few consumers fully understand what usury is, how the Authority regulates maximum finance charges and how the consumer can make use of NAMFISA to ensure they are not being overcharged (abused).

First, what is usury? Usury is the practice of making unethical or immoral monetary loans intended to unfairly enrich the lender. In plain English it means the lender is being made to pay too high interest on a loan. Thus the Usury Act is a law to prevent abuse of lenders and puts a maximum rate at which interest can be charged.

Some of the main objectives of the Usury Act, (Act No. 73 of 1968), are to regulate the maximum finance charges (or interest in short) and to ensure that terms and conditions of credit agreements, including Hire Purchase Agreements, are explained to customers and that fairness prevails in all contracts relating to all credit agreements.

In the public notice, Hire Purchase Outlets and Credit Grantors are reminded that the maximum finance charges or interest is calculated at the average prime rate times 1.6 which is currently at 9.75%. Thus the maximum interest that can be charged is 9.75 times 1.6 which equal 15.60 percent per annum.

Thus you as a consumer are protected under the Usury Act from any credit grantor (such as a money lender) from charging more than N$ 15.60 per year on every amount of N$ 100. If you are taking a loan for a shorter period such as a month, the interest rate must be divided by the percentage of the year the loan is granted. In other words, if you are taking a loan for one month, the interest may not be more than 15.60 divided by 12 thus 1.30 percent. If you have taken a loan from a money lender (and we all know how our January finances are), and are repaying at the end of a month, make sure they are not charging you more N$ 1.30 for every N$ 100 you are loaning.  Please note that certain lenders also charge administrative fees which are separate from the interest charged on the loan.

If you as a consumer have any queries, kindly contact the Microlending and Credit Agreements Department of NAMFISA at telephone number (061) 290 5000 (main), Ms. Lucrecia Lombardt at 061 290 5130 or e-mail: llombardt@namfisa.com.na.

Each One, Teach One

As the year comes to an end, I look back at take stock of what our consumer activism has achieved in 2014. Looking across the media spectrum, I am pleased to note that it is not only the New Era newspaper that has a consumer column. In addition, I appreciate the work being done by new media (mostly from within the traditional media houses) in bringing issues to the attention of consumers, activists and lawmakers. Facebook groups such as the Namibia Consumer Protection Group (NCPG) page have seen a drastic increase in postings, as well as feedback from business.

Now that there is more attention on consumer issues, the question must be asked: Has there been an increase in consumer protection during 2014?

The answer is (unfortunately) NO.

Allow me a few examples:

Just this past week, I ran out of credit on my cell phone. I was sent a reminder by my provider that my credit would run out – the warning though came one day before it ran out, not at the same time it runs out as in the past. At first, I was not too perturbed as I would notice after my first call on the next day that I was off the super package. However, the next morning I sent through my SMS request to purchase the package and went about my business as usual. That evening, I received a message that N$ 2.00 was deducted from my account for data usage. I immediately checked my phone as I had never received such a message before. On checking I found that the service provider had sent me a SMS that I could not participate in this offer as I was already on that specific package. Yet, somehow, later in the same day, my package expired. Now I was deducted N$2.00 and did not have enough funds for the super package anymore.

The service provider had changed my agreement with them regarding informing me of when my package rant out, and had started deducting an “automatic” data charge because my phone used data.

Definitely now a New Year’s wish of mine to get the Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN) to clamp down on these “profit” making practices.

In another example, I received the following from a customer:

“Shelve prices at a certain hyper store (name known to Consumer Court)  is a joke once you get to the pay-point (till). I had to request the cashier 4 times for 4 different products to charge me the price displayed on the shelf. I have had this experience several times at the same store and at others of the same chain. People are just paying without checking the price. I wonder how many people are robbed in this way on a daily basis. Every N$1 counts and makes up thousands of N$ on a daily basis. Even when you speak to the cashiers they are also acknowledging and complaining, because they are the ones to hear all the complaints and insults from customers.”

This same wholesaler had a complaint through Consumer Court earlier this year and they rectified it within a week. Now however, this same business is back and not doing what is best for the consumer. 

The question is thus, as consumer activists we have made the problem known in the media, however Namibian businesses believe (or know) that consumers have no legal recourse and this continue with this type of unethical business practices.

We as consumers must become more active and in the language of the liberation, Each One must Teach One. That is the only way to measure our success and get consumers to know their own rights.