What's going on? What's going on? The product looks the same, but the consumer is getting less. Got that shrinking feeling? Toilet paper with fewer sheets, muesli boxes smaller by spoonfuls, fly spray cans from 350g to 300g. I'd like to know the actual reason for it. It's got to be a rip-off in some shape or form. Nicole and Keith are over? What? Nicole and Keith are over? What? No, they're not. They are going strong, trust me. It's twins! OK, well, that's the first I've heard about that. How do they get away with saying this stuff? Are you the Fair Go guys? Oh my goodness. And our Fair Go experiment. Do you now regret not reading this? Do you now regret not reading this? I think so. Copyright Able 2015 Welcome to Fair Go. Shrinking product, same price. Why do companies think they can get away with it? One Fair Go viewer was determined one company wouldn't. Here's Garth. COUNTRY AND WESTERN MUSIC Stuart Neill loves his '39 dodge, but sometimes to economise you have to downsize. Been all the way to Auckland in this and, uh, round the North Island, but economy-wise, it's better in the wee one. That's what we'll be doing next time. As Stuart motors around Dunedin, something's bugging him ` downsizing that won't wash. Feel it lightly smooth your skin with the gentlest touch of beauty cream. The way Stuart remembers his favourite soap... Knight's Castile ` so gentle with you. His father used to buy Knight's Castile in boxes of four dozen for the farm. You play things over in your mind, until they annoy you enough to be browned off. This is what's annoying Stuart ` This bar was lurking in the caravan from at least three years ago. The others are recent purchases. The net weights of them left to right? I've got it written down here... And even the shape of them now, they don't last nearly as long in the shower in the handbasin. And no cheaper. Aussie manufacturer Pental confirms the price per bar stays the same. I'd like to know the reason for it. It's got to be a rip-off in some shape or form, or in favour of the companies. Rip-off is his word and his opinion. Pental says... and that it did the same thing eight years ago. Downsizing, as it's called, is rampant. Here's a list we obtained under the Official Information Act. We couldn't get brand names, but look at what's shrinking; Toilet paper, fewer sheets and they're narrower, muesli boxes smaller by bowlfuls, fly spray cans from 350g to 300g. We know Cadbury plans to downsize its family block because it was upfront. Points for that. It's usually hard to spot downsizing at the supermarket. You need sharp eyes, a good memory or Edgar Dworsky in your trolley. SKYPE RINGTONE Hey, Edgar, just in time. What's going on? The product looks the same, but the consumer's getting less. That's kind of a backdoor way of raising the price. You've been looking at downsizing in the Stats for 20 years. What should we be watching out for? One of the tricks they use is to divert your attention ` if it says new and improved, usually like a starburst in the top corner of the product, your eye is drawn to that and it's drawn away from the net weight statement, which might show what's new and improved is their bottom line, because they took some of the content of the product out of it. That's one of the tricks of the trade. So it should say, 'New smaller pack.'? What else? Well, we have one example where a peanut butter manufacturer used to sell peanut butter in 18oz jars. All of a sudden they were 16.3oz, but you look at them side by side they looked identical. What did they do? They hollowed out the bottom, so it looked like it was full, but there was a whole bunch of air on the bottom. Is it fair? It's a very sneaky way to raise the price. That's why we tell consumers you really have to become net weight conscious, not just price conscious. In other words, look hard at how much you're getting for the price, something that's a lot easier to do if your supermarket uses unit pricing. That's where there is a clear cost per 100g, 100ml, or whatever makes sense, so that you can compare fairly between different sizes and price points. OK, classic example right here of how unit pricing can help you bust through the downsizing and different sizes ` three boxes of cereal, all the same size to the eye. This one looks cheaper, but no, this one's cheaper. The unit price is lower because there's more in the box. These two same have the same sticker price, but this one's more expensive because there's even less in the box than this one. I'm more of a porridge man myself. Both big chains say they offer it on most items. Countdown says its pricing is more transparent than ever, but it is voluntary, Whereas in Australia it's mandatory in big supermarkets, with strict guidelines on what information shoppers see. Paying attention to that unit price can help you save money. It can also help you spot downsizing. But to actually fight that, well, it's not easy. Just ask Edgar. If your favourite brand downsizes, take a look see if the competitor still is the full size. See if the store brand still is the full size. That's kind of the way to send the message to the manufacturer ` you don't like the fact that they're playing a little fast and loose with the content of your products. Stuart Neill still reckons there ought to be a law against downsizing, that it's misleading. You certainly need to keep it in mind when you're heading to the shops. Some good advice there. I particularly like those unit prices. Oh, I love the unit prices. I spent, like, 10 minutes figuring out which almonds were the cheapest for my desk snack a couple of weeks ago. Unit prices all the way. I like them for cheese. I like them for cheese. Cheese, yes. I like them for cheese. Cheese, yes. Now, Edgar's website.. is loaded with examples where shoppers spot a downsize in progress and dob them in. It's an American website of course, so send us your pictures of Kiwi examples of original and downsized. Let's see if we can keep them honest. Now here is Pippa with this week's consumer quiz question. FUNKY BASS MUSIC Back on the street for our true or false challenge, this week's consumer quiz question ` I'm gonna say... I'm gonna say... Uh, I'll say... I'll say... I'll say... True? Um... This year? This year? < Mm-hm. This year? < Mm-hm. Uh, true. What do you guys think? We've got the answer later in the show. Guilty pleasure time now ` because of course you read them, don't you? Women's mags. All those useful articles, and all the celebrity gossip. How do they get away with saying this stuff? That's the whole point of a cover. It invites you in, and says, 'there's more of this! Wow!' It's twins! I wouldn't say Nicole Kidman is pregnant if she wasn't. And later ` Hi, guys, uh, I just need you to` to read this and sign this. Fair Go guys! Oh my goodness! Fair Go guys! Oh my goodness! LAUGHTER Hey, You're not in trouble. You're not in trouble. Welcome back. Did you hear Kate Middleton's having twins? No, really? Well, it says so on the cover of New Idea, so it must be true, right? Well, not according to Kate Middleton. but does it really matter? And are they allowed to say such ridiculous things? We sent our resident gossip hound Brodie to find out. Oh my God, she's pregnant again? Oh my God, she's pregnant again? Dude, she's totally not pregnant. Ah, the women's mags. Nicole and Keith are over? What? Nicole and Keith are over? What? No, they're not. They're going strong, trust me. Equipped with headlines designed to lure you in. Brodes, she's having twins! Brodes, she's having twins! For the love of Elvis she is not. How do they get away with saying this stuff? That's the whole point of a cover. It invites you in and says, 'There's more of this. Wow, look at us. We've got this. Come and have a look at what's inside.' But what if you wanna buy the mag just cos you've seen that Kate's having twins, and you're all, like, 'I have read about that,' and it turns out to be fluff? So if I were to ask you, 'Posh's Marriage Panic.' What would you think was going to be in the article? She doesn't wanna get married, because she loves someone else. 'Kate ` It's Twins'. It's twins. OK, well, that's the first I've heard about that. What should that story be about, or what do you think that story would be about? That she broke up with someone that she loved. Yeah. So when we actually look at the article though... Ta-da! READS: The actress unravels as her star power dims in Hollywood. So it's actually about her worried "allegedly worried" about losing her fame. Yeah, no, she'll never lose her fame; she's Nicole Kidman. She'll never lose that face if she keeps her plastic surgeon. Oh! Did I say that out loud? Anyway, we want to know if what they're doing is actually allowed. Can they say 'Nicole's Baby Miracle' on the front when she's not actually pregnant? Yeah you are allowed to do that. You can't present misleading headlines. So what is misleading? But, uh, I think the important thing is that it reflects the story inside. I wouldn't say Nicole Kidman is pregnant if she wasn't. But Sido admits there are clever ways to push the headline boundaries. We love a cheeky headline, a bit of, uh, ambiguity too, because we're trying to tease. We're trying to intrigue. We're trying to lure people in so that they do want to find out the full story. But what do the consumers think? Do they have, like, the honest truth in them? No. It's sensationalism, absolutely. They'll take one iota of fact and put a spin on it to get sales. I know women like that sort of thing. My wife does - anything to do with the royals. Royal families, royal babies, their name, what sex they're going to be. I mean, that's all important to them. Important or not there's been a couple of people who've not been so impressed. The Press Council upheld a case in 2006 against the Woman's Day for two headlines... The complainant said that from those headlines there was no indication they were based on rumour or speculation until she bought the mag and read it. She said it misled the public. Interestingly enough, this headline riled someone enough to complain to the Press Council in 2013 on similar grounds, but this time authority had changed its tune. The Press Council has basically said, 'No, we're not going to worry about this form of media, 'because they're, like, a fun media.' They're like a` You could call them a trash media. People don't take them too seriously, so even though they're subject to Press Council regulations, basically the Press Council has said hands off. And really, we are no way near as scandalous as some of the mags overseas. I mean, poor old Bruce Jenner, as if he didn't have it hard enough going through an alleged sex change in front of the world, In Touch magazine goes and photoshops some make-up and a ladies scarf on him. That was outrageous, I'm sorry. You wouldn't do that? You wouldn't do that? No! And while that might've gone too far, case law states that puffery is not considered misleading. And what's puffery? Exaggerations which are so obvious they are unlikely to mislead. So some exaggeration is expected because consumers expect it. Much like the Lynx Effect. # It may be something very physical. # Cos that deodorant is such a turn on, said no one ever. So is this a case of buyer beware? You'd have to be, I think, from another planet not to know what women's magazines are like now. I think it's well known, and people who buy it buy it for exactly gossip. Gossip which is mostly light-hearted. And as for our peeps on the street? In the end, it's a big publicity stunt. But you'd still read it? > But you'd still read it? > Yeah. But you'd still read it? > Yeah. LAUGHTER I believe most people that buy these know what they're buying. I believe most people that buy these know what they're buying. Yeah. Turns out it's not just the headlines people are lured in by after all. There's some good recipes in Woman's Day. I've often leafed through them while on holiday and used them. No, I go for the fitness. Fitness and nutrition ` very important to me. Is it? Is it? Yes, and there's a wealth of information in those women's mags. Oh, well that's good then, isn't it? Oh, well that's good then, isn't it? It is good. It's good for me. You saw the Woman's Day editor in that story. Good on her. The New Idea boss wouldn't go on camera, but Caroline Botting told us the headlines are designed to capture the reader's interest and ultimately to sell the magazine. She says New Idea tries to keep each coverline consistent with the story content, but they don't have the luxury of space for lengthy explanations, so coverlines need to be concise and compelling. Now, do you ever read what you sign? When it comes to the fine print, Mark is all over the new law about what can now be declared illegal. His story could save your bacon. You could say everyone should read the contract, but no one does, So we're just gatecrashing Brodie's shoot to do a bit of a social experiment. I just need you to` to read this and sign this. Are you the Fair Go guys? Oh my goodness. Do you now regret not reading this? Do you now regret not reading this? Oh, I think so. Take a moment to switch your banking to ANZ, and you could win three months' salary. Dinner in New York, anyone? Time really is money. To keep both running smoothly, switch to ANZ today. Welcome back. As of this week, you are now better protected from the fine print. A new law prohibits unfair contract terms. Now, that is a big deal, but why are insurance companies not covered by the law? And why are you not allowed to use the law yourself? Here's Mark. UPBEAT MUSIC You never know who you're going to bump into on a sunny day on an Auckland street. Excuse me, hello, how are you? So we're just gate crashing Brodie's shoot to do a bit of a social experiment. Hi guys, so I just need you to read this and sign this. Oh, you're the Fair Go guys. Oh my goodness! (LAUGHS) My sister loves you guys. You're not in trouble. You're not in trouble. We're asking people to sign a standard contract allowing us to use their image on Fair Go. I just need you to write your name and your mobile, have a quick read of this and see what you think. Well, do you want to cast your eyes over it? Oh, look, it's all good. None of these people read the fine print. They should've ` we buried a sneaky surprise in there. It's` Yeah, it's shocking, actually. (LAUGHS) (LAUGHS) I see. You guys aren't lawyers, are you? I used to be, I started my career as a lawyer up the road. I used to be, I started my career as a lawyer up the road. He's my legal advisor. Stay with us and we'll tell you what they signed away later, but the reality is most people don't read the small print in a contract until something goes wrong. You could say everyone should read their contract, but no one does. Do you? Do you? No. And Alexandra Sims is an expert in contract law. I haven't got enough time to read every single thing I enter into, and plus you know that they're almost as bad as each other. How bad? Louise Davidson, one of Alexandra Sims' graduate students looked at a hundred different standard contracts. So, for example this one there, they basically said the terms and conditions were subject to change without notice. So not good. Essentially, it was the Wild West. I mean, some industries were worse than others. So the classics are rental cars, gyms, airlines, they were the worst offenders. But under this new regime, we're meant to be moving from the dark into the light. So if you think a term in your contract is unfair, take it to the Commerce Commission, and if they agree they'll take them to court. Obviously if that clause affects one consumer, it probably affects several or many and we won't necessarily know there's a problems out there unless consumers tell us about them. Sounds good, right? Well maybe not. the Commerce Commission has the knowledge to deal with the complexity of it, but they simply do not have the resources. There's no additional funding. We don't investigate all of the complaints we receive at the moment, but we're confident we will be able to investigate those that really are important to consumers. The Commerce Commission has prepared a helpful guide, but some say it's not what's in it, it's what's not. For example, whether you live there or not, we all felt the raw despair of the people of Christchurch as they battled to rebuild their lives after the earthquakes. Well, after successfully lobbying Parliament those insurance companies are largely untouched by the new rules. What about if the consumer thinks their insurance contract contains unfair terms? Insurance is an area that is largely exempt from the provisions as they've been drafted, so it's not an area that we are likely to be looking at in any detail. We should have the same laws applied for all industries, and so why single out one industry for a special treatment? It doesn't make any sense. And forget about complaining about fees and charges unless there's a sneaky unfair penalty in there. Do you wanna read this or...? Do you wanna read this or...? Oh no, I'm OK. > You're OK, you trust me? 'Remember those nice, unsuspecting people we pinched off Brodie?' Guess what they've just signed up for? Did you know you've just signed away the custody of your first-born child? (LAUGHS) That's all right. I've had enough of those. We just sign it because we get told to sign it. We just sign it because we get told to sign it. LAUGHTER Do you now regret not reading this? Do you now regret not reading this? Oh, I think so, but I think if it was taken to court, I don't think it would stand up very well. So be careful out there. You know those 100 contracts, real contracts from real companies, that Alexandra and Louise were poring over? There was not a single contract that excluded every unfair term. Almost all of them would include at least one unfair term in their contracts. It appears the Commerce Commission will certainly have its work cut out for it if wants companies to redefine their fine print. Will it work? In theory when you look at it, yes, because it says you can't use unfair contract terms. The trouble is that if you have an unfair contract term or a term that you think is unfair and the business is trying to enforce it against you, you can't do anything. All you can do is go to the Commerce Commission. If the Commerce Commission says, 'No we're too busy,' or 'we don't have the resources,' there's nothing you can do. So, good news but maybe not great news? Yeah, it's a bit frustrating. Yeah, it's a bit frustrating. Mm. And this week's quiz question you should know the answer to. We just did a story about it. Ah, the sweet streets of central Auckland. Perfect weather for a True or False challenge. And this week's question was... If you sign a contract with unfair terms, this year it will be easier to get out of. Now, if you watched Mark's story earlier, you will already know the answer is... This year? This year? < Mm-hm. This year? < Mm-hm. Uh, true. Yep, it's true. Next time, banking. So, yes, unfair terms in contracts can be declared illegal. We'll keep an open mind on how successful is going to be, but if you've got a contractual shocker, send it to us at... And Consumer NZ is campaigning about this. Have a look at their playfair page at... They're going after gym contracts in particular. Now, we get a lot of complaints about being left waiting on the phone. The telcos seem to get the most flak. So, a challenge ` the longest call challenge. I had a rather, um, frustrating experience with Vodafone recently. There is my call record ` two hours 18 minutes on the phone to Vodafone customer service, Most of it on hold. Lovely people, Pippa. Actually, quite good music too, but that's a very long time. I cannot begin to imagine what you must have been like after that happened, Gordon. So can you beat Gordon's time? We'll give a donation to the charity of choice of whoever has the longest wait. Now, you'll need a screenshot or details from your bill. Sorry, but we do need to verify your call somehow. There's the address. You've got a week to get it to us. So that's the show. We will be on Facebook for the next half hour to answer your questions. Our programme is all about your problems, your thoughts, so do get in touch. And don't forget to send us those contract shockers. We are looking for the most unfair of them all and your long customer service calls. We're on Facebook. Email us at... And next week ` The lady told me she is prepared to face her. Motorist vs. tow-truck driver. I saw the tow-truck driver backing, um, the tow truck into my car. Unless you've got a hundred dollars, he wasn't going anywhere. It's, like, threatening, so I have to pay him a hundred dollars. Do you know what towies are legally allowed to do? She's right, according to the law, isn't she? Is she? She is sitting in it. She wishes to leave. He can't tow her away, and he can't charge her any call-out fee. That's next week. Goodnight. Copyright Able 2015