Consumer Law And Deceptive Marketing Guidelines Case Study

Consumer Law And Deceptive Marketing Guidelines - Case Study Example Most good companies would avoid such a situation and try to provide a product as per the specifications. Thus it would be wise to study both sides of the aspect and neutrally evaluate the outcome in best interests of society and individuals as well as reasons for companies providing a service or a product, albeit with a rider that profitability than service is their prime concern. The history of consumer protection is not as old as that of the consumers. In 1962, President John F Kennedy introduced 'The Consumer Bill of Rights.' However, before 1965, there was no effective legal protection available for consumers across the world. The idea was first conceived by Garland Dempsey. In December 1965, probably the first refund of $ 787 was provided by a finance company to Mr. and Mrs. Henry Outlaw, the lucky neighbors of Garland Dempsey in North Philadelphia. Mr. Dempsey filed the complaint on their behalf in regard to a swindle of the refinancing of a loan. Another such case, the Gallman case got nationwide approval and led to passage of Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1968 by the Congress. This act was later aptly called "The Truth in Lending Act", the first in the series of consumer protection legislation. Today, across the world, consumer protection laws have evolved protecting consumers from all kinds of manufacturing and retailing defects, protection from fraudulent advertisements, invasion of privacy, deceptive marketing techniques and many such issues. Sections of population defend both sides of the arguments which lead to millions of litigations across the world with sometimes heavy penalties for defaulting companies in the event of intentional deception or even unintentional action leading to loss or damage to a consumer in a financial/personal manner. With the passage of time, certain conventions have emerged for the corporate sector to strictly adhere to, failing which they can be held guilty of consumer rights violation.