Almost everyone who has a smartphone and has spare cash has probably bought something online using any or both of the popular ecommerce sites in the Philippines.
Some may have been duped by the online seller, receiving a package that contains a rock instead of an expensive new cellphone or getting defective or clearly substandard goods.
There are even online shoppers who have paid for and received items they didn’t remember having ordered.
Most return the defective or substandard merchandise and got their refunds but largely, Filipino online shoppers don’t bother especially if the item involved was priced cheaply.
In the case of the allegedly grounded radio made in China and ordered online for just P187, the issue is no longer return and refund but that of damages to the family who lost their beloved.
The problem, however, is that existing law – Republic Act 7394 (the Consumer Act of the Philippines and the RA 8792 (the Electronic Commerce Act) – provides that if an imperfection in the product is not corrected within thirty (30) days, the consumer may alternatively demand at his option: a) the replacement of the product by another of the same kind, in a perfect state of use; b) the immediate reimbursement of the amount paid, with monetary updating, without prejudice to any losses and damages; and c) a proportionate price reduction.
RA 7394 penalizes such violations, upon conviction, with a fine of not less than P5,000 or by imprisonment of not more than one (1) year or both upon the discretion of the Court.
This means that if the bereaved family wants to exact justice from the seller and/or manufacturer, it will have to sue, which they want to avoid considering the costs it involves.
Then there is the difficulty of scientifically proving that a grounded antenna really caused the electrocution, as the appliance in question is no longer whole but in pieces.
The incident presents an object lesson for all online shoppers, most of whom do not bother to open or read the Guarantee Policy that the ecommerce site usually posts along with the product description.
One popular site guarantees that if the item received has issues, the money will be refunded if the item is returned within three (3) days for “non-choice” items and thirty (30) days for “choice” products.
It likewise assures 100% authenticity of all items but only if it is among those sold by “mall” sellers.
But the policy is not always implemented. In some cases, the free pick-up of returned items by shipping partners is never followed through, with the online seller probably thinking it would be more expensive to have the cheap item returned due to high shipping costs.
A recent study following the growth in ecommerce transactions showed that reproductions and off-brand goods of varying quality, as well as the lack of guaranteed product quality, is the leading challenge to online shopping.
The absence of clear guarantees on the authenticity and durability of products, the study stated, contributes to a sense of uncertainty, deterring potential buyers from making confident purchasing decisions.
Just as the online consumer must be aware of the concept of caveat emptor (Latin for “let the buyer beware”) which means that an individual buys at their own risk, online sellers must abide by caveat venditor (let the seller beware) by making sure that their products and services function as advertised.
The government, in promoting the general welfare of the people, should actively implement policies and specific laws towards creating a more reliable and trustworthy online shopping environment where the buyers get what they really want.