Post by account_disabled on Mar 13, 2024 6:43:04 GMT
The Brazilian Post and Telegraph Company (ECT) cannot charge postal dispatch fees from consumers who have already paid for the postal service to the entity sending the product. This is abusive conduct, in light of article 39 of the Consumer Protection Code (CDC). Consequently, if overcharged, the Post Office must refund the amount to the consumer.
reproduction
Consumer bought fishing accessories from Chinese website, paying shipping. But the Post Office charged postal dispatch fees
Reproduction
With this understanding, the Regional Standardization Panel (TRU) of the Special Federal Courts (JEFs) of the 4th Region of the Federal Court granted a request for standardization of the interpretation of the law. The thesis was confirmed in a virtual panel judgment session held last week (15/5).
Uniformity incident
The jurisprudence standardization B2B Lead incident was raised by a consumer who purchased fishing accessories from an online store in China. Adding the value of the product and the shipping fee, he paid a total of R$18. He stated that, when the merchandise arrived in the country, the Post Office retained the purchase, claiming that they could only release it upon payment of the shipping fee. postage, worth R$15.
The issue reached the TRU after the man appealed the decision of the 1st Appeal Panel of Paraná, pointing out a difference of understanding in relation to the 3rd Appeal Panel of Santa Catarina. While the panel that judged the appeal of the action, in Paraná, considered the postal dispatch fee to be legitimate, considering that it did not represent a repetition of charges, the panel from Santa Catarina judged the issue as an increase in value without just cause.
The rapporteur of the ruling on the standardization incident, federal judge Andrei Pitten Velloso, the winning vote in this trial, noted that, according to the CDC definitions, the tariff is classified as abusive.
Considering that the Post Office does not justify charging the fee beyond what the consumer already pays for the freight, “the said fee is abusive, since the sender has already paid for the postal service through specific stamps or stamps, pasted or affixed at the origin , when shipping the goods by post”, highlighted the magistrate.
Thesis confirmed
With the decision, the TRU pacifies the uniform understanding in the JEFs of the 4th Region under the following thesis: “the charging of the postal dispatch fee by the Brazilian Postal and Telegraph Company – ECT is abusive, and it is up to the latter, for be the recipient of the amount, the responsibility for returning the amount unduly charged”. (With information from the Press Office of the Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region)