ACCC threatens fines if Tiger misleads consumers over future flight purchases

Tiger: cunning and shrewd in the wild. In its business practices? Not so much.

Apparently the ACCC advised the airline to caution customers that flights operating after 9 July may not operate given the aviation safety regulator, CASA, had placed a suspension on their flights for safety reasons.

In a stroke of purrrr genius, Tiger decided to ignore the advice and persisted with selling fares on flights scheduled to operate after 6am 9 July without disclosing that they were contingent on CASA lifting the suspension of the airline's licence to fly.

Surprise surprise, the suspension was not lifted.

Tiger has now made a "commitment" to ACCC on the remedies it will offer customers affected by the suspension of its flights. Good kitty.

ACCC takes court action against SensaSlim for alleged misleading claims

Any business that propagates the mantra "nothing tastes as good as slim feels" should really be force-fed a couple dozen of those butterscotch fudge donuts from Krispy Kreme, and then get back to us.

Not eating has probably made SensaSlim, a "slimming solution" distributor, a little light headed. The ACCC is prosecuting SensaSlim for making false representations to its customers in relation to purported scientific trials conducted on SensaSlim's oral slimming spray and the earnings opportunities with its franchises.

So what now? Waiting for the fat lady to sing, of course.

Court penalises online ugg boot trader over Australian made claims

If you ask a group of 10 people to name an iconic piece of Aussie clothing, odds are one of them will say the ugg boot.

When Marksun Australia Pty Ltd, an online seller of ugg boots, began saying their ugg boots are sown in Australia when in fact they're made in China, the ACCC got a little angry and Marksun copped a $430,000 fine. Ugg.

There are special provisions in the Competition and Consumer Act for country of origin representations, and the ACCC takes this stuff very seriously. Best avoided.

$185,000 penalty for misleading allergy treatment claims

People who sneeze even while watching Bondi Vet will tell you that there is nothing more annoying than being told their allergies can be tested and treated when they can't.

For those poor pollen pessimists, Newlife Publishing and Marketing Pty Ltd and Renew You Centre for Wellbeing and Longevity Pty Ltd and two of its representatives falsely claimed they could treat and/or cure allergies using the 'BioFast allergy elimination program'.

The miracle treatment involved applying pressure to various parts of the body when being exposed to potential allergens. What a ground breaking medical marvel.

The Federal Court thought otherwise. It ordered penalties totalling $185,000 and, in a first for the ACCC, obtained orders for a corrective video on YouTube.

Optus fined $5.26 million for misleading broadband advertising

Optus has been a bit naughty in recent months with three of its major campaigns being savagely devoured by the consumer watch dog. Most recently on the menu was Optus' "THINK BIGGER" and "SUPERSONIC" broadband plans.

The ACCC began salivating when Optus represented that customers would receive a data allowance without disclosing that the service would be speed limited to 64kbps once the peak data allowance had been exceeded.

The Federal Court fined Optus an impressive $5.26 million for the broadband campaign. That's the biggest penalty ever for misleading advertising. The idea was to punish Optus and send a very clear message to the telco industry about advertising practices. Mission accomplished. Optus is appealing the penalty.

This isn't the only time Optus has been in trouble for its ads recently. It also got busted when the ACCC found out that its max cap' mobile plan was actually a minimum spend. That one cost them another $200,000.

Questions? Give us a call.

We do not disclaim anything about this article. We're quite proud of it really.