Sunday 4 February 2024
The Court of First Instance in the Wilayat of Ibra recently issued two court rulings against two commercial establishments for violating the Consumer Protection Law and its executive regulations. The court convicted the two institutions and imposed fines on them.
The case originated from a complaint filed by a consumer who had taken his damaged vehicle to a vehicle repair workshop after a traffic accident. However, when the vehicle was inspected by the Royal Oman Police, it was discovered that the repairs were not done properly, and the vehicle did not pass the inspection.
Upon receiving the consumer's complaint, the Consumer Protection Authority (CPA) initiated its standard procedures. They appointed a technical expert to investigate the matter, and the expert's report confirmed that the workshop had indeed failed to repair the vehicle properly. As a result, the Public Prosecution conducted further investigations and subsequently referred the case to the Court of First Instance.
The court reviewed the case and found the defendants guilty of the misdemeanor of non-compliance with the proper provision of the service. They were sentenced to a fine of OMR 1000, with OMR 100 to be executed for each defendant, while the remaining amount was suspended. Additionally, the court ordered the defendants to pay the legal expenses, including the fees of the technical expert.
In the second ruling, another commercial establishment was convicted by the same court for violating the Consumer Protection Law. In this case, a consumer had contracted with a vehicle repair shop to repair the transmission in his vehicle. However, the workshop failed to repair the transmission defect within a period of more than three weeks. After this delay, the workshop owner informed the consumer that the vehicle required an electronic part (TCM) and claimed that it was the consumer's responsibility to provide it. The workshop owner cited the consumer's failure to provide the electronic chip as the reason for the prolonged repair period.
Frustrated by the workshop owner's procrastination in completing the repair, the consumer lodged a complaint with the Consumer Protection Authority (CPA). The CPA assigned a technical expert to investigate the matter, and the expert's report confirmed that the vehicle had not been repaired up until the inspection date.
The Public Prosecution initiated investigations based on the expert's report and subsequently referred the case to the Court of First Instance. The court found the defendant guilty of the misdemeanor of failure to provide the service properly and imposed a fine of OMR 100 as a punishment.