Clipping of news on Brazilian Culture, Law and Citizenship
08.21.2015
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
transparent image
Customer name was entered in the credit protection register by the company
Recently, the Claim HERE News has given special attention to cases of unauthorized charges. Moreover, even if a charge is valid, no one is bound to be charged menacingly. In either case, the consumer can open an action for damages.
This week, a decision put the agenda the discussion about how consumers should proceed on these occasions. The goal here is not to point this time, this or that company, but to show that the consumer can and should pursue his rights.
On Wednesday, the 18th, the judge of the 13th Civil Court of Campo Grande (MS), Alexandre Correa Leite, upheld the action brought by a consumer against a cable TV company, ordered to pay compensation for moral damages the amount of R$ 12,000 related to improper debt collection.
He claims the author who had his name entered by the defendant in the credit protection registry (SCPC), on behalf of two alleged debts incurred in another state in June 2011 and December 2012, R$ 1,022.00.
Says that customer, although the company's subscriber in Campo Grande, did not request any service in the State of Goiás and also suffered moral shock as it had Register barred in a commercial setting and even in the presence of people known.
Thus, the defendant asked for a compensation for moral damages in the amount of fifty times the amount of collected debts, and the exclusion of his name from the default of registration.
Company Side
In its defense, the cable company claims that it took all the necessary precautions to prove the author's identity occurred when purchasing services. It argues that there was no practice of tort or the occurrence of moral damage alleged by the author.
For the judge, it was proved that the fault lies exclusively with the company because there was no other agreement with the defendant, which it seems was awarded by fraud by third parties. "From their screens reproduced by the defendant in its defense it can be seen that the number and origin of author RG differs from its true document," he claimed.
Thus, the claims made by the author have been upheld. "Recognized the lack of debt, evident that their incontrovertible release the defendant on behalf of the author, with the credit protection bodies, was irregular, equating the service defect, pursuant to art. 14 of the CDC, "concluded the judge.
So, it is worth the consumer to take the reins to not be hostage to a misunderstanding or even bad faith on the part of companies. Maybe so, brands do not begin to think better before offering a product or make unauthorized charges to their customers.
Case No. 0841074-37.2013.8.12.0001
Text based in the area of the portal Legal Scope
Source: Complain Here
To access the site Complain Here, click here.
Our news are taken in full of our partner sites. For this reason, we can not change their content even in cases of typographical errors.
transparent image
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.