Show more results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Join our team
EN / ES

The Directorate of Consumer Protection Investigations of the Superintendency of Industry and Commerce issued Resolution No. 65205 of October 16, 2020, through which it imposed a penalty of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE MILLION SIX HUNDRED SIX THOUSAND PESOS M / CTE ($ 1,755. 606,000) -2,000 smlmv- to RAPPI SAS, the maximum established by Law 1480 of 2011 (Consumer Statute), for violating different precepts of the consumer statute.

It is noteworthy that the Management established that RAPPI participates during essential moments of the transactions carried out on the platform and not only during contact between consumers, business partners and Rappitenderos. At the SIC’s consideration, this platform performs essential functions in consumer operations such as payment processing, processing and receipt of payment reversal requests, and it also profits from the operations carried out through the platform. , for which it acts as an electronic commerce platform and not as a simple intermediary or contact portal.

Consequently, the Management established that RAPPI is not a contact portal as its terms and conditions indicate, but that this platform is reputed as a provider of goods and services on a regular basis and for profit. Specifically, we consider it relevant to highlight the following regarding the decision:

  • The infringement of the right to information that assists consumers, since this platform did not inform about the existence of the right of withdrawal prior to the offer, nor did it inform them that they could receive their returns directly and not by means of credits.
  • The improper processing of petitions, complaints or claims.
  • The use of advertising pieces that in the opinion of the Management constituted public offers and were not simply a reproduction of advertising owned by third parties.
  • RAPPI did not prove that consumers could access their PQR information after filing it, nor was RAPPI’s responsibility regarding the legal guarantee established.

It is important to bear in mind that the graduation of the fine imposed was due to the fact that the SIC identified that in multiple situations RAPPI put the rights of consumers at risk, which constituted an aggravating factor in terms of the Directorate.
Additionally, through Resolution No. 65397 of October 16, 2020, the SIC imposed another sanction on RAPPI of SEVEN HUNDRED TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED FORTY-TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED PESOS M / CTE ($ 702,242,400) equivalent to EIGHT HUNDRED (800) smlmv , for non-compliance with administrative orders, aimed at guaranteeing the rights of consumers and which specifically consisted of:

i. Inform, prior to the acceptance of the offer made through its electronic commerce platform, what corresponds to the prerogatives of withdrawal and reversal of payment regarding the transactions that are executed through its website or mobile application;

ii. As well as what corresponds to having a PQR mechanism that would allow after the filing of the same, that consumers could follow up on the procedure,

iii. Likewise, it did not adjust the contractual provisions that it submitted through filing number 18-256766-32 of October 9, 2019 and that it made known to consumers, in the sense that abusive clauses were not included;

iv. In the same way, it did not report the corresponding to the total price of the products, without it being possible to modify the values ​​after the moment of accepting the purchase order and

v. It did not clearly establish its intervention against the legal guarantee that assists consumers, having the capacity and the possibility of doing it, as was demonstrated throughout this action, so this criterion will be applied for the dosage of the sanction.

Against these decisions, the remedies for reconsideration in subsidy of appeal proceed, which must be filed within 10 business days following the notification of the administrative acts.