Oil Service Firm Drags INNOSON To FCCPC Over Poor Quality Vehicles, Breach Of Trust
Petronella (Nig) Limited, a Port Harcourt based oil service firm, has petitioned the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission(FCCPC) against fraudulent activities of INNOSON Vehicle Manufacturing (IVM) an indigenous manufacturing firm.
Petronella in a petition dated Jan 10 and signed by Olaniwun Ajayi, its legal representative purchased goods from IVM which in the course of the relationship behaved in ways that breach several provisions of the FCCPC Act and caused considerable damage.
Petronella entered into an agreement with Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd. (SPDC), in September 2021 to provide SPDC with pick-up trucks for use in SPDC’s operations,
It said, given the environment in which SPDC operates, vehicles intended for the company’s use must meet certain engineering and safety specifications. In particular, SPDC required that vehicles leased from Petronella must possess a five-star New Car Assessment Programme (NCAP) rating.
The company said IVM gave assurance to Petronella that IVM Vehicles have all the features as requested by SPDC, as contained in their email dated Sept.04, 2021.and on that Petronella requested, and IVM issued, an invoice for 20 units of IVM’s five-seater, double-cabin, 3.0L diesel pick-up known as the IVM Granite.
It said each unit of the IVM Granite was priced at N21,5 million amounting to N430 million for which it paid a deposit of N415 million in three installments of N65 million, N80 million and N270 million, leaving a balance of only N15 million.
According to Petronella, IVM only supplied eight out of twenty vehicles, the vehicles supplied did not have the features that IVM claimed they would have, and IVM has refused to refund money paid by Petronella
“Despite having received about N415 million from Petronella by 29 October 2021 for twenty units of the IVM Granite, IVM did not deliver the vehicles within the two-week timeframe that it had promised.
“When IVM finally delivered vehicles to Petronella, it delivered only nine vehicles, one of which it immediately retrieved because of a defect in the engine, so that Petronella was ultimately left with eight vehicles but of the 20 that IVM had agreed to supply, IVM never delivered the remaining 12 vehicles,” it stated.
Petronella said the vehicles that IVM delivered did not meet the specifications that it had claimed that they would meet, including possessing a five-star NCAP rating.
It said when Petronella requested an NCAP crash test report, IVM did not provide any but . rather, it forwarded via email a document that looked like a crash test report which gave no indication that it had been issued by a crash testing authority.
“IVM’s failure to provide a crash test report verifying that the IVM Granite had that rating meant that Petronella could not fulfill the terms of its agreement with SPDC. In consequence, SPDC rescinded its lease with Petronella.
“Given that Petronella had purchased the vehicles specifically to perform its lease with SPDC, SPDC’s rescission of the lease meant that Petronella no longer had need of the vehicles.
“Therefore, Petronella deliveries the eight vehicles to IVM’s service center in Port Harcourt on Dec. 2021. It then notified IVM of the delivery and demanded a refund of the N415 million that had been paid for the vehicles,” it stated.
The company said in addition to the N415 million which IVM had refused to refund, it had lost about N805 million per day in expected income from the rescinded SPDC lease, from Nov. 4 2021 to date. excluding inability to repay the koan it obtain dur to IVM’s refusal to reimburse it.
It said. IVM’s conduct constituted a violation of Petronella’s rights under the FCCPC Act: 14.1. Standards for marketing goods (section 123(1)(a) and (b) of the FCCPC Act) – which prohibits a producer, importer, distributor, retailer, trader or service provider from making any representation for the purpose of promoting or marketing goods in a manner that is likely to imply any false or incorrect representation.
” Act 14.2. Right to return goods (section 122 (a) of the FCCPC Act) – which entitles Petronella to return goods within a reasonable time if the goods are unfit for its intended purpose and receive a full refund for same. 14.3. Right to fair dealings (section 125 (1) (a) of the FCCPC Act).
“This provision holds, an undertaking liable to pay damages or monetary restitution where in the marketing of any goods or services by words or conduct, the undertaking directly or indirectly expresses or implies a false, misleading or deceptive representation in relation to a material fact to a consumer or prospective consumer.
“We urge the Commission to ensure that this matter is investigated and appropriate relief provided to our client,” it stated.
