Enforcement Response Register

This register contains warnings, settlements and judgments since 1 January 2014 under the Fair Trading Act 1986, the Commerce Act 1986, and the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003.

It does not contain all enforcement responses before this date or enforcement responses withheld under the Official Information Act 1982.

Please note that judgments will be published as we receive them from the Court. This can sometimes be several months after the relevant hearing.

Selected Judgments

Enforcement Response Guidelines

Our guidelines describe how the Commission enforces New Zealand's fair trading, competition and credit contract laws.

Parties Act/Section Description Resolution Year
Reckitt Benkiser (New Zealand) Limited Fair Trading Act 10 Reckitt Benkiser (New Zealand) Limited pleaded guilty to 10 charges under section 10 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 for making representations on its website and on packaging giving the impression that the Nurofen Specific Pain range of products were specifically formulated to target a particular type of pain, when this was not the case. Judgment 2017
Baby City Retail Investments Limited t/a Baby City Fair Trading Act 30(1), 46A Baby City was ordered to pay a fine of $39,000 following admissions it had breached section 30(1) of the Fair Trading Act 1986 by supplying household cots that did not meet the mandatory safety standard. The mandatory product safety standard is established by the Product Safety Standards (Household Cots) Regulations 2005. Baby City has also entered into Undertakings with the Commission to carry out a series of testing and quality control procedures designed to ensure that all household cots Baby City supplies comply with the safety standard. Judgment and Enforceable undertakings 2017
Latitude Financial Services Ltd t/a Gem Finance CCCF Act 26A Latitude Financial Services Ltd (trading as Gem Finance) was warned for likely breaching section 26A of CCCFA by failing to notify debtors with the statutory time of assignment (via sale) of their debts to Baycorp. Warning letter 2016
Barfoot & Thompson Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 Barfoot & Thompson Limited was ordered to pay a penalty of $2.575 million following admissions they breached s 27 via s 30 of the Commerce Act by entering into and giving effect to a price fixing agreement with four other real estate companies to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me. Judgment 2016
Harcourts Group Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 Harcourts Group Limited was ordered to pay a penalty of $2.575 million following admissions they breached s 27 via s 30 of the Commerce Act by entering into and giving effect to a price fixing agreement with four other real estate companies to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me. Judgment 2016
LJ Hooker New Zealand Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 LJ Hooker New Zealand Limited was ordered to pay a penalty of $2.475 million following admissions they breached s 27 via s 30 of the Commerce Act by entering into and giving effect to a price fixing agreement with four other real estate companies to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me. Judgment 2016
Ray White (Real Estate) Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 Ray White (Real Estate) Limited was ordered to pay a penalty of $2.2 million following admissions they breached s 27 via s 30 of the Commerce Act by entering into and giving effect to a price fixing agreement with four other real estate companies to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me. Judgment 2016
Property Page (NZ) Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 Property Page (NZ) Limited was declared to have aided, abetted, counselled or procured five real estate companies to breach s 27 via s 30 of the Act. The real estate companies entered into and gave effect to a price fixing agreement to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me. No pecuniary penalty was imposed on Property Page (NZ) Limited. Judgment 2016
Lugton’s Limited Commerce Act 27 via s 30 Lugton’s Limited was ordered to pay a penalty of $1,000,000 following admissions they breached s 27 via s 30 of the Commerce Act by entering into and giving effect to a price fixing agreement with four other real estate companies to pass on to vendors the cost of advertising properties on Trade Me, and to take down existing Trade Me listings. Judgment 2016
ANZ Cars Limited Fair Trading Act 28 The Commission has reasonable grounds to believe that ANZ Cars Limited breached section 28 of the Fair Trading Act by failing to comply with the consumer information notice requirements for used motor vehicles set out in the Consumer Information Standards (Used Motor Vehicles) Regulations 2008. Infringement – paid 2016
Youi NZ Pty Limited Fair Trading Act 13, 21(c) Youi NZ Pty Limited was ordered to pay a fine of $320,000 following admissions it had breached sections 13 and 21C of the Fair Trading Act through various false representations. These included representing that consumers could obtain a quote online when in fact this was not possible for the significant majority of customers; customers bank or credit card details were required to generate a quote when this was not the case; customers were obtaining a quote when in fact a policy was being issued. In addition Youi asserted a right to payment for unsolicited insurance policies by sending letters demanding payment and/or debiting consumers’ bank or credit card accounts without their express permission or knowledge. Judgment 2016
Smartcash Limited CCCF Act 105C(1), 17 The Commission issued three infringement notices as it had reasonable grounds to believe that Smartcash Limited breached s17 of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 by failing to include information required by paragraphs (ua), (ub) and (uc) of Schedule 1. Infringement – paid 2016
Nezam Anwer and Zodiac Motor Company Limited Fair Trading Act 13, 46A Zodiac Motor Company Limited was ordered to pay a fine of $105,000 following admissions it had breached section 13 of the Fair Trading Act by making false representations that its vehicles were AA appraised and that it was an AA Appraised Used Dealer. The company’s director, Mr Anwer has entered into Enforceable undertakings to pay Zodiac’s fine if the company fails to do so on time. Judgment and Enforceable undertakings 2016
Karu Trading Company Limited Fair Trading Act 30(1) We have warned Karu Trading Company Limited that it is likely to have breached section 30(1) of the Fair Trading Act 1986 by supplying teddy bears that did not comply with the mandatory product safety standard. The mandatory product safety standard is established by the Product Safety Standards (Children’s Toys) Regulations 2005. Warning letter 2016
Bear Cottage Fair Trading Act 30(1) We have warned Bear Cottage that it is likely to have breached section 30(1) of the Fair Trading Act 1986 by supplying teddy bears that did not comply with the mandatory product safety standard. The mandatory product safety standard is established by the Product Safety Standards (Children’s Toys) Regulations 2005. Warning letter 2016
Fletcher Steel Limited Fair Trading Act 13(a) Fletcher Steel Limited was warned for a likely breach of section 13(a) of the Fair Trading Act relating to representing that particular batches of 500E mesh complied with the requirements of the Standard (AS/NZ 4671:2001) when it did not. Warning letter 2016
United Steel Limited Fair Trading Act 13(a) United Steel Limited received compliance advice for a potential breach of section 13(a) of the Fair Trading Act relating to representing that particular batches of SE62 500E mesh complied with the requirements of the Standard (AS/NZ 4671:2001) when it did not. Other 2016
Godfrey Hirst NZ Limited Commerce Act 67 Court of Appeal decision rejecting Godfrey Hirst’s appeal Judgment 2016
PTMO Limited Fair Trading Act 09, 13(b), 13(c), 21C(1)(b) The Commission has issued a warning to PTMO Limited for sending a notice to trademark holders that is likely to breach the Fair Trading Act 2003 and mislead trademark holders. Warning letter 2016
Vikram Mehta Fair Trading Act 21, 40

Crimes Act 240, 66
Vikram Mehta, former director of Flexi Buy Limited, has been found guilty under s 240 of the Crimes Act 1961 for aiding Flexi Buy to obtain money by deception by making false representations to customers that their goods would be supplied after they made full or partial payments, knowing that the goods would not be supplied. Charges were also filed under s 21 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 as Mr Mehta aided Flexi Buy to accept payments from customers when at the time of acceptance he either did not intend to supply the goods or did not have reasonable grounds to believe that the goods would be supplied within a reasonable time. Mr Mehta will be sentenced on two charges under s 240 of the Crimes Act. Judgment 2016