A complaint is filed against Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon for not giving the trading counterparts opportunities to peruse the contract prior to signing , violat ing Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Chinese Taipei

Case:

A complaint is filed against Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon for not giving the trading counterparts opportunities to peruse the contract prior to signing , violat ing Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Key Words:

Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon, slimming and beauty, standard contract

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of May 5, 2005 (the 704th Commissioners' Meeting), Disposition Kung Ch’u Tzu No. 094045

Industry:

Barber and Beauty Shops (9620)

Relevant Laws:

Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

1. The case originated from a complaint filed against Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon by a member of the general public, stating that the Salon did not give the trading counterpart an opportunity to peruse the contract prior to signing and did not sign any written contract with the trading counterpart. In addition, the Salon did not publicly exhibit the professional certificate and the professional qualification of its employees at the visible corner of its business site. It is alleged that the operation of the Salon violated the Fair Trade Law.
2. Th is Commission’s investigation found that Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon did not give its consumers any written agreements for reference regarding the membership services, the continued courses or package courses. The Salon only stated in the courses’ receipt that “The consumer is regarded as having signed the beauty standard contract with the Salon once he/she signs this course order form, and thus agrees with the stipulations and prescribed rights and obligations of the standard contract.” In addition, the certificates in beautician for the Salon’s employees were kept in the director’s office and not publicly exhibited at the Salon’s premise. However, the Salon has corrected the mistake and placed the said certificates at the business hall at the time that this Commission’s personnel went over to conduct examination at the premise of the Salon.
3. Grounds for disposition and resolutions:
1. Th is Commission sent personnel to the premise of the Salon to undertake an investigation; the investigation found that the Salon did not exhibit publicly the certificates in beautician for the Salon’s employees at its premise and also not sign any written agreement with the membership consumers. Furthermore, Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon openly admitted that the Salon did not sign any standard contracts with its members from the beginning of 2002 to March 2005. The Salon also did not take the initiative in giving its consumers the written standard contract for perusal prior to trading; it only recorded the course name, amount, frequency of product and unit price in the course order form. Moreover, Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon unilaterally stipulated in the course order form that “The consumer is regarded as having signed the beauty standard contract with the Salon once he/she signs this course order form, and thus agrees with the stipulations and prescribed rights and obligations of the standard contract.” For consumers who have spent thousands of dollars in the membership , continued courses or package courses, their rights to peruse the contract were deprived when the parties’ rights and obligations were explained orally, the Salon failed to make public the professional qualifications of its employees and no written contract was signed. Under such circumstance , the ambiguity of rights and obligations for the parties would hinder the trading counterparts from claiming their rights. The acts of Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon constituted abuse of its relatively dominant position and were obviously unfair to its consumers. It is likely that many more unidentified parties were injured by the obviously unfair conduct of Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon for not disclosing the aforementioned important consumption information. Such conduct is an obviously unfair conduct sufficient to affect the trading order , violating the provision of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law.
2. To sum up, Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon, engaged in slimming and beauty business, failed to give the trading counterpart an opportunity to peruse the contract prior to signing , failed to sign any written contract with the trading counterpart for membership continued courses, package courses, and failed to make public the certificate in beautician of its employees. Such conducts were sufficient to affect the trading order and violated the provision of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law. Taken into consideration the motivation, purpose, and expected improper benefit of the unlawful act of Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon; the degree and duration of the act’s harm to market order; benefits derived on account of the unlawful act; the operating condition and market position of the Salon; past violations; remorse shown for the act and attitude of cooperation in the investigation; therefore, Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon is ordered to cease the aforementioned unlawful acts and an administrative fine of NT$100,000 is imposed.

Summarized by Tai, Mei-Chin;
Supervised by Lu, Li-Na

Appendix:

Hsu Hui Chi of Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon’s Uniform Invoice Number: S222546610 / 18439144