Procon-SP studies collective action against companies that charge convenience

messi22

Procon de São Paulo is considering filing a public civil action against the main companies that charge a convenience fee when purchasing tickets online. The action will be based on the decision of the Superior Court of Justice that considered the charge illegal. Procon/SP Procon is considering filing a public civil action against the largest ticket sales companies that charge a convenience fee The STJ's decision reinforces Procon's old position, that charging fees is illegal as it violates articles 39, item V, and 51, item IV, of the Consumer Protection Code. In other words, charging for a service that, in fact, is not provided to the benefit of the supplier alone — and to the detriment of the consumer.

After the STJ's decision, Procon-SP has already notified Iran Telegram Number Data companies that offer the service in the state of São Paulo to suspend the charge, under penalty of fine. According to the agency's executive director,  Fernando Capez , the convenience fee, to be valid, must be beneficial to both parties. However, he explains, the supplier that charges the fee simply for making tickets available online is abusive. "Selling over the internet is an advantage for the supplier in that it presents its offer to a much larger universe of consumers, makes sales faster and more practical and enhances the increase in sales and the supplier's profit, this is already the advantage.



Adding a second advantage — charging the convenience fee — would result in an excessive advantage for the supplier and an unnecessary burden for the consumer, characterizing abusive charging", he states. She cited Precedent 221 of the Superior Court of Justice: ''Both the author of the writing and the owner of the publication vehicle are civilly responsible for compensation for damages resulting from publication by the press''. According to the judge, the case in the case deals with a consumer relationship, where the plaintiff is considered to be insufficient, as provided for in the Consumer Protection Code.