Dont say your rent is cheap if its not

ACCC alleges unconscionable conduct by landlord of retail premises

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has instituted proceedings in the Federal Court, Melbourne against Dukemaster Pty Ltd and its general manager, Ms Patricia Wong for alleged misleading, deceptive and unconscionable conduct and making false representations in contravention of the Trade Practices Act 1974*.

Dukemaster is the landlord of a retail shopping centre called the Paramount Retail Centre located in Melbourne.

The ACCC alleges Dukemaster engaged in unconscionable conduct by taking unfair advantage of its stronger bargaining position, exerting undue pressure and using unfair tactics against certain tenants in connection with their leases.

The ACCC also alleges Dukemaster represented to certain tenants that it believed rental it proposed was very reasonable and below the market value when in fact it had no such belief. The ACCC alleges Dukemaster did not have a reasonable basis for making this representation.

The ACCC alleges Ms Wong was knowingly concerned in and party to Dukemaster’s alleged contraventions of the Act.

The ACCC's proceeding involves a representative action seeking compensation for certain tenants who are alleged to have suffered loss and damage as a result of Dukemaster's and Ms Wong's conduct. The ACCC is also seeking declarations, injunctions, compliance and disclosure orders and an order that Dukemaster and Ms Wong pay the ACCC’s costs of the proceeding.

The matter has been filed in the Federal Court's Fast Track List and is listed for a scheduling conference in Melbourne on 12 November 2008 before Justice Finkelstein.


General inquiries
Infocentre 1300 302 502
Release # NR 283/08
Issued: 3rd October 2008

Background
*The ACCC alleges that Dukemaster contravened ss 51AC, 52 and 53(e) of the Trade Practices Act. S. 51AC prohibits unconscionable conduct in business transactions by corporations when they supply goods or services. S. 52 prohibits conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive. S. 53(e) prohibits the making of false or misleading representations with respect to the price of goods or services.

Thats gonna hurt....

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/844848
 
Standard tactic of those who allege and sue.

1. Scream from the rooftops "on what basis".
2. Wait for "basis" to be provided.
3. Meanwhile gather opposing basis from other extreme angle.
4. Attack / discredit and undermine provided "basis" when it shows up.
5. Both parties meet in the middle, where they should have met in the first place.


There is a massive, massive difference between 'allege' and "the court found to be the case".....usually watered down by a factor 3.7.
 
Back
Top