The European Consumer Centre Czech Republic is contacted by consumers experiencing problems with traders from an EU country, Norway or Iceland. The Centre’s lawyers try to help consumers assert their rights in the European common market.

One of many successfully resolved cases was the case of a Czech who purchased a new motorbike in Germany. Although he made it clear upon purchase that he was taking it to the Czech Republic, the price of the bike incorrectly included value added tax, which is to be paid only in the country where the vehicle is registered. Because of this error, the consumer paid VAT twice: once in Germany and then again in the Czech Republic. The consumer tried, in vain, to get his money back from the merchant and the tax office in Germany. He then turned to the Czech European Consumer Centre (ECC) for help. On the basis of his complaint, the case was taken up by our partner German ECC, who persuaded the vendor to refund the incorrectly charged VAT.

“Rules for the payment of VAT on purchases abroad are the same for all new motor vehicles, including quad bikes, which are now very much in vogue. Buyers don’t pay VAT in the country of purchase, and should keep an eye on this, as they will definitely have to pay tax in the country where the vehicle is registered,” points out the Czech ECC director, Tomáš Večl. Detailed information on this issue can be found at www.coi.cz/esc, which provides information such as the fact that, for used vehicles, VAT is paid in the country of purchase, and that a vehicle is regarded as new if it is not more than six months old and has not travelled more than 6,000 km.


Car rental company debited her account

A Czech woman borrowed car on holiday in Denmark. After returning home, she found that the car rental company had added a charge, via her card, allegedly for the repair of the bodywork.

“Additional charges to consumers’ cards are a relatively common practice in Western Europe and are set out in the service agreement,” says Ondřej Tichota from the European Consumer Centre (ECC) Czech Republic. In this case, the customer felt affronted because as far as she was aware the car was not damaged during the time she used it.

She contacted the company, which insisted it was in the right and refused to refund her money. Making no progress in this dispute, the customer resorted to the free services offered by lawyers at the Czech ECC. In collaboration with their Danish colleagues, they invited the Danish car rental company to prove that the Czech consumer had damaged the bodywork. “In this case, the burden of proof rested with the seller. However, he was unable to prove that the consumer had actually damaged the bodywork, so he returned the money back to her account,” says Ondřej Tichota.

A seemingly trivial complaint about footwear in a German supermarket escalated into a drama. A Czech consumer living in the border area purchased a pair of hiking boots.

“After three months, the soles on both shoes cracked. I tried to complain to the seller, but they refused my verbal claim in the shop on the grounds that the shoes had been used,” explained Milena Skřivánková to lawyers at the European Consumer Centre (ECC) Czech Republic, whom she asked for assistance.

The lawyers advised her to submit a complaint in writing and provided her with the German complaint form. Although she could have sent everything by post, she decided to take the form and the footwear directly to the store, where they took and confirmed receipt of the complaint. “But when I came back to hear what opinion they had reached, once again I was only verbally informed that the shoes were defective and worn, that the guarantee was void, and that the two-year guarantee was limited to electronics. The shop manager returned the boots to me with the complaint form, which had not been filled in, and when I requested a written statement he crudely waved me away, saying he would not put anything on paper, that he had informed me orally, and that forms like this can be downloaded two a penny from the Internet,” describes the Czech customer. “Several times he indicated that he did not believe such a thing as the European Consumer Centre existed, claiming that I was only using scare tactics when I said I would be seeking the Centre’s help.”

The Czech ECC studied the case and forwarded it to colleagues at the German ECC, who discussed the situation with the company management. The outcome was favourable, though somewhat surprising. “The retailer formally maintained his rejection of the complaint, but was willing to return the purchase price of the footwear to the Czech customer,” says Tomáš Večl, director of the Czech ECC, as he describes the paradoxical position assumed by the retailer.

Milena has little appreciation for this attitude. Although she is pleased that the claim is settled and that she got her money back, a solution where the retailer has his cake and eats it is of little comfort. “I was hoping that if I persisted and saw the complaint through to the end the seller would learn a lesson in how to handle complaints, and train his employees accordingly. Declaring that they are in the right but will refund me my money is rather odd.”

Although the consumer’s complaint was legitimate and made within the statutory time limit, only a court can secure the acknowledgement of an error by a vendor. ECC director Tomáš Večl notes:  “Solutions in the vein of ‘have your cake and eat it’ will crop up under certain circumstances as this is the nature of mediation, which forms the basis of the ECC’s operations. Wherever possible, our task is to find a solution acceptable to both parties. Mediation may involve the need for certain trade-offs and, as we can see, the end result can still be successful.”

“If you send us the attached money-back application form, we’ll send you CZK 1,900,” read Marie Voborníková, a Czech consumer, in a leaflet issued by a famous camera manufacturer. After selecting and purchasing a product, she filled in the form and sent it to the listed address of the company in Ireland, looking forward to the money she had been promised.

However, this highly appealing marketing offer by a global camera manufacturer had a fundamental flaw – many customers waited in vain for the cash to be sent to their accounts. Some consumers even bought products entitling them to as much as five thousand crowns, but the company either failed to reply to enquiries or, after being sent reminders, made excuses, as in the case of our Czech consumer.

“The only information I got from them was that I had sent the wrong bank details, so they couldn’t send me the money. My banker wanted the company to send a copy of the payment order so that she could work out why the money had not arrived. The company didn’t respond and all our communications after this came up against a brick wall,” says Marie Voborníková.

She then turned to the European Consumer Centre (ECC) at the Czech Trade Inspectorate for help. “The company was handling about sixty similar cases, and our colleagues from the Irish ECC were exhaustively communicating with it in an effort to enforce the rights of our clients. The work on this case lasted several months, but we managed to get the company to pay the promised money,” says Tomáš Večl, director of the Czech ECC, which helps consumers with problems involving foreign vendors of goods and services within the EU.

If you have had a problem with a foreign trader and you can provide evidence, such as proof of purchase of the goods or services in question, or communications with the seller, you can enter a competition to find the most interesting or funniest experience with a retailer from an EU country, Norway or Iceland. You can win a CZK 20,000 laptop, a CZK 10,000 camcorder or a CZK 5,000 camera. Send an e-mail to esc@coi.cz briefly describing your story and attach proof of purchase or communications with the merchant. The contest will last until January 2010 and the results will be announced in the March issue of TEST. The competition is organized by the Czech ECC and TEST magazine.