So it isn't "false advertising", it is misleading advertising. Bell had to add those caveats last years during the CAIP propceeding when they started to claim that we were causing congestion on sympatico customers or that a small group of users were ruining the whole internet.
If you state something in large lettering on your advertisements and then use fine print to state that your advertising claims are hollow, void, misleading or otherwise inaccurate/wrong, it feels a lot more like false advertising than misleading advertising since the advertisement itself states in the fine print that the marketing claim is a bold face lie.
At least, Quebec consumers who get tricked into a contract by misleading/false advertising may soon be able to walk out of such contracts much more easily when the next set of Consumer Protection Act amendments get through:
quote:Penal clauses Bill 60 amends section 13 of the CPA to clearly provide that penal clauses (i.e., stipulations requiring consumers to pay costs other than interest accrued upon non-performance of an obligation) are prohibited. The current version of section 13 had been interpreted by Quebec courts to allow the use of penal clauses in consumer contracts. Bill 60 therefore amends section 13 of the CPA to restore the original legislative intent by prohibiting penal clauses. The current and amended versions of section 13 do not apply to credit contracts.
This amendment will effectively BAN termination fees in Quebec and render long-term service contracts ineffective as anticompetitive lock-in tools.
At least, Quebec consumers who get tricked into a contract by misleading/false advertising may soon be able to walk out of such contracts much more easily when the next set of Consumer Protection Act amendments get through:
This amendment will effectively BAN termination fees in Quebec and render long-term service contracts ineffective as anticompetitive lock-in tools.
