The competition watchdog is appealing after a court dismissed its allegation that LG Electronics misled customers about their warranty rights on faulty televisions.
The Federal Court in September dismissed the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s allegations that LG made false or misleading representations to certain customers about their rights in relation to faulty products.
The ACCC, which launched proceedings against LG in December 2015, argued that when a defect occurred after the LG warranty had expired, customers were told they would have to pay the costs of assessing the repair and that the company had no further obligations.
Customers were also told they were entitled to have a television repaired but not entitled to a refund or a replacement, and were liable for any labour costs to fix the problem.
The Federal Court dismissed the ACCC’s allegations on September 1, finding that LG was not obliged to to tell customers about their options under Australian Consumer Law.
On Monday, ACCC deputy chair Delia Rickard said the watchdog had lodged a notice of appeal, saying it was important to seek clarity from the Federal Court on this case.
“In particular, this appeal is about the extent to which manufacturers should inform people seeking a remedy for a faulty product about their consumer guarantee rights,” Ms Rickard said in a statement.
“Products and services come with consumer guarantees which may provide remedies over and above those in any manufacturer’s warranty.
“The ACCC will take appropriate action to ensure that consumers are not misled about their consumer guarantee rights.”
LG general manager Angus Jones said the company was disappointed with the ACCC’s decision to appeal the judgement and will continue to defend the allegations.
“We take consumers’ rights very seriously and we have confidence that our rigorous policies and procedures ensure LG adheres to the Australian Consumer Law,” Mr Jones said in a statement on Monday.
The decision to appeal comes less than a week after the watchdog lodged similar action against the Federal Court’s dismissal of its allegations that Medibank Private deliberately failed to notify members of new limits on pathology and radiology benefits.