Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/90155419@N00/2209615981

We are all consumers according to the definition provided by the Consumer Protection Law, namely – "persons who buy a commodity or receive a service from a dealer in the course of his business for mainly personal, domestic or family use".

I think we all agree that we need protection, but do we know what our rights are?

The Consumer Protection Law which was enacted in 1981 has been amended 24 times. It is this latest addition which came into force on the 26^th September 2008 to which I draw your attention. It sets out to improve the service we get at home from technicians and limits the leeway they previously had to keep us waiting at home for them for many hours. It moves in the right direction, but implementation could be problematical.

If the consumer is entitled to receive the technician in his home to effect repairs in terms of the "period of responsibility" or according to a service contract, then the service provider shall coordinate the date and hour with him and if the technician is more than two hours late, the consumer is entitled to compensation in the sum of NS 300 and if three hours late, the compensation is NS 600. Note that the law explicitly states that this compensation is not subject to proof of loss.

The question will arise, of course, as to how this will be proved in court. The best advice is to make a contemporaneous note of the time agreed upon together with the name of the person with whom it was fixed.

As a substitute for the fixing of a time for the visit, the service provider may propose to the consumer that he wait for a telephone call on condition that he will not have to wait longer than two hours at his premises and provided that the consumer was advised that he can reject the idea of the phone call.

The law also allows the service provider to inform the consumer by no later than 8.00 pm on the evening before the agreed visit that the visit is postponed and to set a new date and time.

The service provider is also given the opportunity of offering compensation in goods or services to a consumer who would be entitled to the monetary compensation already mentioned.

But before any litigious consumer seeks to apply amendment 24 to practise his legal acumen in court, note that if a delay was due to causes that the service provider did not know and was under no obligation to know when the date and time of the visit was fixed, or if he did not see and could not have seen them in advance or prevent them, then the consumer shall not be entitled to compensation! [My exclamation]

Before a female consumer gets annoyed with me for referring to a consumer in the male gender, I hasten to add that no insult is intended because according to Law, the male embraces the female.

Finally, readers should note that many of our laws [including he amendment discussed above] have been expertly translated into English by Mr. Aryeh Greenfield of A.G. Publications. Office number 04 8255104 e mail arye4434@bezeqint.net

N. Hertzel Katz has a private practice in Ramat Hasharon. He is an executive member of Esra and a former chairperson.