Idec was against charging different prices for sale on the card or cash
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
6/8/2009
The Office, PL which can allow different is wrong and transfers the cost problem of traders rental card machines and management fees for the consumer, and mask a larger problem: the need for regulation of the private operators credit
Idec forwarded to the Commission for Consumer Protection of the House of Representatives a demonstration against the PL which provides for the differentiation in prices for payment by cash or credit card for the same product or service, changing the CDC (Protection Code Consumer).
Although lawmakers justify the approval of the project arguing that the consumer would benefit because it could get a discount for cash in relation to the sale price by credit card, the Office believes that the opposite would happen.
In establishing this change in the CDC, the PL would open up many possibilities for the dealer to raise prices surreptitiously. Idec believes that the CDC is not the ground for such a proposal, since it is a problem involving one supplier and not for consumption.
In addition, the Code does not prohibit the provider to give discount to consumers who buy in cash today. The Institute also repudiates the strategy include this issue in the Provisional Measure. 460, considering it completely irrelevant.
Costs for traders
In relation to the costs borne by retailers on purchases paid with the card - for the rental of machines and card administration fees - Idec is sensitive to the issue and advocating the revision of these values, they consider the problem points to the need for regulation sector managers card to make them more competitive.
Operations with payment cards (debit and credit) moved R$ 375.4 billion in 2008. In all, 5.3 billion were carried out transactions with 514 million cards, with a predominance of two flags. The result of this merger is the growth of consumer complaints.
Commercial establishments are currently allowed to practice different prices, however, are not required to accept credit cards as payment. So from the moment you switch to other means of payment, besides cash, to impose any restriction on the payment method chosen by the consumer involves a misuse.
The transfer of costs to the consumer is linked to the cost of maintenance of terminals and the time that the administrator requires to shift the purchase to the store, currently around 30 days. Importantly, however, that this cost has been passed on to consumers at the time of formation of the selling price of the product or service.
Not to mention that usually the consumer already funding the scheme for payment of annuities cards. Once adopted the differentiation of the purchase price in cash, the consumer will pay double the costs of the current system.
Source: IDEC
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
Important:
The JurisWay site does not interfere in the work provided by doctrine, why only reflect the opinions, ideas and concepts of their authors.
