The Galaxus thread made me wonder: why don’t we have stronger consumer protection laws here?
There could even be a referendum to force the issue. Are people here just too rich to care about being ripped off?
Our government is run by business people. QED
3 Likes
What would you add to the list of protections?
- Ban outrageous practices such as the Galaxus one allowing retroactive additional invoicing of already sold and delivered items
- Make auto-renewing contracts opt-in (oh, you didn’t cancel in time, you’re signed up for the gym another year)
- Make cancellation easier (why can you sign up online but have to cancel in-person/by mail)
- Cooling off periods (probably already exists for financial products etc)
- Mis-leading advertising (if you put a 50% off sticker, the basis has to be from the lowest price in the last 6 months)
- Reasonable fees (50 CHF for a late bill reminder? No way)
- Let’s not forget the government too: charge 6% late interest on tax but pay only 0.005%. No, impose a maximum spread of, say, 1%
2 Likes
I don’t believe that the thread about Galaxus is in any way an example of weak consumer protection laws in Switzerland. These guys make EUR 1.4bn of consumer re-sale business which means thousands of small transaction every day. Mistakes are bound to happen and I don’t think this is in any way their business model (to skim the consumer).
On top, I honestly believe that consumer protection could go really far. I personally dislike the US style consumerism where one can return anything, for no reason, 0 questions asked 10 days later and get a cash refund. I actually like the fact that the consumer in Switzerland is forced to be a bit more thoughtful AND because things are more expensive. We are living in a country where rampant consumerism doesn’t exist and I love that about Switzerland.
2 Likes
I agree the sticker price should be the price you pay, no arguments and no price changes.
I remember when I first moved here, I needed a new phone in a hurry, and it needed to work in the U.S.
Phones really weren’t that smart in those times so I just chose one I liked the look of, at the right price, and with the requisite cellular phone frequencies for the U.S. It was advertised as such in the phone shop in a huge advertisment.
I went. It didn’t work. I checked the manufacturer’s website and the phone didn’t support those frequencies.
The phone shop said it wasn’t their mistake as the advert on their wall, and on the display tag were wrong and I couldn’t get a refund.
I’ve still got that phone in a box somewhere - unused.
I had so many other bad experiences here that I stopped buying electronics here and bought in Germany for a time instead.
So yes, consumer laws here have a lot to be desired.
Anybody can invoice anyone for anything, you don’t need any grounds for that. So yes, Galaxus can of course try to invoice more after the fact, that just doesn’t mean it’s lawful or enforceable. And of course this has nothing to do with Switzerland, it applies everywhere.
The seller must present the price, including all mandatory taxes and fees, before the consumers makes the order. Changing the price later on, especially in the way Galaxus does, doesn’t conform with the regulation and seems clearly unlawful.
The regulation also forbids the use of one-sided T&C.
Further, the base price for a rebate must either be the seller’s prior price or the market price (ie. used by the competition). And the duration of the rebate phase can’t be longer than half the time that base price was used. So, what Manor does with the artificially increased price is unlawful provided the description is accurate.
https://www.seco.admin.ch/seco/de/home/Werbe_Geschaeftsmethoden/Preisbekanntgabe/FAQ.html
Maybe I just buck the trend but I’ve found that whenever things have gone awry with a product or a service here, I’ve always been able to get them to sort it out, refund or replace. I’m usually super-polite but stick to my guns. Often if you ask them what solution they propose, it’s hard for them to back away from the problem.
1 Like
The problem is that it is in their terms and conditions so either they are in breach of the regulation or, more likely, the regulation does not apply to Switzerland.
It would be helpful if you could provide a reference to the regulation you refer to, in Switzerland they are numbered so just the number is sufficient.
LMAO
You can lead the donkey to the water but you can not make him drink.
Surely the donkey is one who claims regulations exist but cannot substantiate their claims
It’s not my problem that you can’t be bothered to read what’s provided, and instead expect to be spoonfed every little detail.
It is your problem when you claim regulations exist when they do not
It’s your choice to remain dumb.
You often claim things exist that do not and when I challenge you your answer always is I should go and search for these fictions.
I may be dumb but not that dumb 
1 Like
There uused to be some minimal protection here but the Bundesrat in their infinite wisdon have decided to effectively remove it… Used to be a % off price could only be advertised for half the time the corresponding “was” price was active. Now they can run it as long as they like as long as the “was” price was valid for at least 30 days,
1 Like
And this is why it would be optimal that this issue is escalated to courts. A judge would rule if lawful or not. Thousands of debt collections processes would not be started. A lot less time wasted for the sellers and consumers.
I learned the hard way that there is no right to return a faulty device, only a repair - it was a laptop bought directly from its big manufacturer who could not repair it.
Another issue - TWINT - it is a bank transfer and not a payment system with a consumer protection. There is zero recurse if something goes wrong.
When I bought car tires at Galaxus, fortunately I paid with PayPal. Not all tires were delivered, and somehow my case fell into the cracks of the system (between Galaxus and a 3rd party). When, after weeks of back and forth, I maid a PayPal claim, only then Galaxus solved the issue.
1 Like
Thanks for the reminder. I’ll remember to use TWINT only for inconsequential purchases like parking.
My TWINT is linked to my credit card account so I have recourse through them.
3 Likes