Survey uncovers areas of consumer concern in beauty and fitness centre service
The operation of beauty and fitness centres has come under the close scrutiny of the Consumer Council.
This followed a recent Council's survey in which a greatmajority (over 80%) of consumers have voted in favour of regulatory control overthese establishments to safeguard consumer interests.
Over 60% of the respondents have expressed concern overspecific areas of operation in the trade.
There is at present virtually no legislation governing theoperation - the personnel and devices used - of beauty and fitness centresin Hong Kong. The centres need only to apply for business registration to be inthe business.
The findings of the questionnaire survey were based onsome 3,200 consumers who have the experience of using beauty and fitness centreservices in the past 12 months.
Top on the list of consumer concerns are related to: thequality of the beauticians, the safety of the devices and the cosmetics used forthe treatment. Over 90% of the respondents were in favour of regulation in theseareas.
The quality of beauticians, in particular, is of greatconcern to many consumers:
- 35% of the respondents said the attending beauticians never conducted any enquiry about the conditions of their skin or health prior to the treatment.
- Some 60% said the beauticians made no mention of any possible adverse side-effects from either the treatment or the cosmetic products used.
- Less than 5% of the respondents took note of and could remember the professional qualifications of their beauticians while 60% apparently paid no heed to this question.
Consumer concern is alsocommon over the safety of beauty devices used for treatment:
- Among the 44% of respondents who received treatment using devices, 10.2% had no knowledge whatsoever of what sort of equipment used.
- Among the beauty devices commonly used for treatment were: electric current (58.8%), ultrasonic (10.3%), laser (9.4%), ultraviolet (9.3%).
- Among the 118 respondents who received laser treatment, 64.6% indicated the attending beauticians did not require them to wear any protective cover over the eyes, posing a health hazard.
On the safety of the cosmeticproducts used, many respondents were completely in the dark about the cosmeticsbeing applied for the treatment. And over 10% claimed that they had sufferedside-effects from the products used or sold as separate items for their own use.
Another major area of consumer concern is related to: thesales and advertising tactics, and the method of prepayment commonly adopted inthe trade. Such tactics include, notably, bait selling with very low prices,imposing additional charges for extra goods and services in the course oftreatment, exaggerated claims on effectiveness of treatments. In this respect,over 80% of the respondents also favoured some form of regulation.
In view of the findings of the survey, the ConsumerCouncil will be holding discussions with the Government on measures tostrengthen consumer protection in the use of beauty and fitness centre services.Such measures will include self-regulation, legislation or licensing.
The Council will publish in two parts articles on this topic in CHOICE. In this latest (277) issue of CHOICE was published results of comparisons on the services provided by 12 beauty and fitness centres.
Council calls for labelling requirements for traditional Chinese medicinal liquors
Traditional Chinese medicinal (TCM) liquors often contain herbs and snakes of a great variety and bear claims of therapeutic value.
To find out if these liquors contain undesirablesubstances or toxic chemicals in excessive quantity, the Consumer Council withthe assistance of the Government Laboratory has conducted a test on 30 TCMliquors. Therapeutic efficacy requires extended scientific research and is notpart of this test.
The results are by and large reassuring: the samples, withone exception, were free from excessive harmful methanol, heavy metals such asarsenic and chromium, pesticide residues and colour additives.
The only exception concerned one sample found to containmethanol with concentration just slightly exceeding the limit set by China andTaiwan. In Hong Kong, there is no specific legislative control over the level ofmethanol concentration in alcoholic drinks.
The Council, however, is concerned over the prevalence ofinadequate labelling on these products which, because their alcoholic strengthis higher than 1.2%, are exempt from the Food and Drugs (Composition andLabelling) Regulations.
Although the exemption applies to all prepackaged foodwith an alcoholic strength by volume of more than 1.2%, TCM liquors usuallycontain ingredients far more than just alcohol.
This means that producers of TCM liquors are not legallybound to disclose any information of substance to consumers. They need not, forinstance, give indication even as to the precise nature of their products.
Nor are they required to display on the label such vitalinformation as the ingredients, "Best Before" or "Use By"date, instructions for use and storage, name and address of manufacturer orpacker, weight or volume.
This is not only unfair but potentially hazardous toconsumers. For instance, in two of the samples tested were contained the colouradditive Amaranth the consumption of which may cause allergic reaction for somepeople. And though alcohol in itself can be kept for a long time without decay,TCM liquors may not. An appropriate "Best Before" or "UseBy" date should be labelled.
More importantly, as TCM liquors contain medicinal herbsand possess certain pharmacological effects they are not always suitable forconsumption by people in certain health conditions.
The test also uncovered another problem with theseproducts. The Department of Health which has been notified of the Council's testfindings, suspects that the claims made by 11 of the samples may contravene theUndesirable Medical Advertisements Ordinance.
These suspected claims refer to treatment of rheumatism,arthritis, neuralgia, renal problems, anaemia or impotence. In some cases theyclaim even to prevent cancer.
Further, consumers are likely to be enticed by the richcolour of these liquors in the belief that it comes from the substances releasedby the herbs. But that may not be the case.
According to the test, colour additives were detected in 5samples all of which were either snake wines (2) or snake bile wines (3). In the case of the 3 snake bile wines, one wonders if the greenish yellow colour comes from the snake bile or the presence of tartrazine, a yellow additive.
While these colour additives are permitted to be used in food, consumers habitually taking TCM liquors are consuming such additives in no small quantity.
Consumers are urged to consult the test report in this November issue of CHOICE.
Consumers' right to freely negotiate fees in the use of legal probate service
A Consumer Council survey has revealed wide variance in the practice by law firms in charging for probate work.
The price variance is believed to be largely due to some law firms which still charge their clients according to the Probate Scale set by the Law Society.
But according to the Law Society, the Probate Scale was provided for the guidance of members in charging for non-contentious probate work and is neither statutory nor mandatory.
Consumers should be informed that such Probate Scale nolonger has any relevance, and that they could freely negotiate fees, and makeprice - and service quality - comparison.
The Council's survey was based on 37 law firms whichresponded to a questionnaire between May and August this year.
The findings revealed wide variance in their pricing. Butin most cases, 35% or some 13 of the respondent law firms charged withoutexception according to the fee scale for probate work.
5% were on hourly fee while 19% combined both chargingmethods. Another 19% adopted the Probate Scale with discount and the remaining22% used various charging methods depending on the circumstances.
For a typical non-contentious probate work, according tothe survey, the variance ranged from the lowest of $3,000 to the highest of$107,000 - a difference of over $100,000!
The survey clearly showed that law firms on Probate Scalewere more expensive. They charged an average of $81,692 which is significantlyhigher than the average of $45,000 to $51,500 charged by law firms using othercharging methods.
In choosing a law firm, consumers should bear in mind thatprice is not the only consideration, they should also take into account suchfactors as the complexity of the work and the quality of service.
The Hong Kong Solicitors' Guide to Professional conductprovides that a solicitor should when requested by a client give an estimate ofthe likely cost of the service.
To safeguard the right of the consumers to be informed,the Consumer Council proposes that the Guide should go further to require a solicitor to take the initiative to inform his client the cost estimate and to explain the basis of the charges.
Information disclosure on charges will not only enable consumers to compare the fees of different law firms but will also enhance healthy competition of the legal profession in price and service.
Full findings of the survey are in this November issue of CHOICE.
Consumers urged to immediately return "WOW!"rice cookers under recall for safety reasons
Consumers are reminded to immediately return a defective model of rice cooker under recall by its supplier.
In July, for reasons of safety, the supplier concerned conducted a voluntary recall of the rice cooker identified as "WOW!"
But, so far, quite a number of rice cookers have not beenreturned and are believed to be in the possession of consumers who may or maynot be aware of the precise problem and the potential hazards of the product.
The Electrical and Mechanical Services Department hassince conducted a safety test on the rice cooker. The test report revealed anumber of test items to be unsatisfactory and the product potentially hazardousto its users:
- the creepage distances, the clearances and the distances through insulation, in particular, the distance between the screw of the power switch (a live part itself) and the metal bottom cover becomes too close when a compression force is applied to the bottom, posing potential hazard of electric shock;
- inadequate protection against access to live parts;
- fitting of screws and connections unsatisfactory; and
- inadequate marking and instructions.
Consumers are urged to take note of this reminder and to immediately stop using the rice cooker and return it to the retailer concerned for a refund. The Consumer Council will also forward this information to its counterpart organisations in the mainland and in neighbouring countries as some of these rice cookers might have been brought there.