# ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online



## nt00deep (20 Jun 2006)

That was the headline this morning on the radio, and I waited, and waited, and waited for the correction. It did not materialise.

Here is a snip from an email I sent to the European Consumer Centre asking for clarification on their press release and interview on Morning Ireland.

"_I heard with amazement this morning that one third of goods ordered online in the EU are not delivered. This was the opening of the interview on Morning Ireland. I awaited a correction, but it did not materialise, altough I did sense from the interviewee that in fact the "one third" phrase referred to one third of cases/complaints handled by ECC related to non-delivery._

_I heard a similarly misleading opening statement on the Ryan Tubridy show, but did not get a chance to hear the piece in full._

_I had a look at your press release this morning and indeed your fine report, and I have reached the same conclusion I reached after listening to the piece on Morning Ireland. It would appear that one third of cases/complaints handled by ECC relate to non-delivery, but it is not correct to extrapolate this to conclude that one third of all goods ordered online are not delivered, because account is not taken of the number of online orders for which case/complaint are not referred to yourselves (which I can only assume are positive experiences for the most part)._

_If my reading of your data is correct, then the headline quoted on your website and on the radio media this morning is misleading. A logical interpretation of the headline would be that of the 318,000 consumers shopping online in 2005, over 100,000 of them had experienced a failure to deliver. Clearly that is a shock statistic, and I don't believe it for a minute._

_Instead of the headline "*1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*" would it not be correct to say "*1 in 3 complaints re: shopping online relate to delivery failure*"._

_I am amazed that none of the media organisations that carried the story picked up on this._

_Can you confirm that my understanding of the data in your report is correct and that we do not have a 33% failure rate when ordering online._

_I should say that I have no affiliation to any online businesses, but I do work in the IT industry. My interest here is as an interested shopper, rather than as a worried trader._"

(end quote)

If anyone is interested in looking at this, the press release and report are here ...
[broken link removed]

I await clarification from ECC, but if my take is correct, I can't believe such a shock (and misleading) statistic was left stand. Just in case I don't get a response from ECC, I would be curious to hear if anyone heard the statistic being clarified/questioned/corrected in any other media outlets.


----------



## ClubMan (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

I'm not really surprised. Most "news" coverage these days seems to be regurgitation without research or question of press releases issued by various bodies. Fair play to you for taking the time to challenge them on this.


----------



## nt00deep (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

I have received the reply from ECC.

In summary, my theory is correct regarding the headline being inaccurate.

A snip of the underlying data is as follows.  In 2005 in Ireland, over 380,000 consumers shopped online.  ECC Dublin heard from 222 consumers who experienced problems with shopping online.  One third of them (approx 75) related to failure to deliver, and one quarter of the failure to deliver cases (approx 20) were cases where the consumer had actually been charged for the undelivered product/service.

Look at it another way: 55 consumers reported problems where goods failed to arrive, but they were never charged for them, so these would relate to failure to confirm/process the order on the part of the vendor.  Only approx 20 cases related to consumers having paid for product and not receiving the product.

20 cases of product paid for and not delivered.  55 cases of product ordered, not delivered, but not paid for.  380,000 active online shoppers.  The conclusion: "1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online".

Even allowing for a generous extrapolation to account for consumers that had problems but did not report them to ECC, how anyone could report (without tongue in cheek) the stated headline really does beggar belief.


----------



## euroDilbert (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

I also emailed RTE about their misleading interview this morning and their incorrect summary on their 'Morning Ireland' news web page. 

I haven't had a reply so far.


----------



## Superman (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

The most stupid report I heard on Morning Ireland happened a few years ago.

It was regarding the actual speed of cars when caught with radar guns.  Basically because cars are not moving directly at the gun, but at an angle, the speed measured is "incorrect".  The report suggested that this would put 
speeding cases in jeopardy, as someone might be "incorrectly" clocked at 60 kph when they were only going at 50. they even had some solicitor in saying "oh, it sounds like these drivers might have a case".

Of course as an Junior Cert. Ordinary level maths student would be shouting at the radio at that stage, if your car is moving at an angle to the radar gun it only makes your speed DECREASE.    
Since statistics is part of Leaving Cert. maths, it is even less likely that they know what they are talking about...


----------



## GreatDane (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*



			
				ClubMan said:
			
		

> ...Fair play to you for taking the time to challenge them on this.


 

Agreed.



I'd love to know, out of those who registered complaints of one form or another, how many referrred to the same websites - for example, could we quickly discover that there are infact only a handful of websites involved in these complaints, or are there several hundred being complained about etc.

A shame we can't get a list of them, but I guess that would be too much to hope for.   

Furthermore, the headline is a real shame as there are many positive aspects to shopping online and many many thousand of online retailers, which are legit, do deliver etc 

Regards

G>


----------



## Guest127 (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

heard Brendan on the Matt Cooper show this evening and when Matt asked the question of Brendan, about 1 in 3 goods not being delivered,  and before Brendan even had a chance to reply Matt took it upon himself to ask ( and answer) his own question ' is this a case of An Post not delivering the goods' Brendan then went on the explain one of his own cases where he received an empty box and when he brought it to the seller's attention they replaced it. Personally I have ordered cds and dvds from different companies, tickets from ticketmaster, cosmetics from strawberry, other goods from amazon and ebay and everything arrived ok, if sometimes a day or two later than advertised. Strawberry probably being the closest to actual promised delivery times.


----------



## nt00deep (20 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

It certainly was heartening to hear Brendan and Matt Cooper open and close the issue in 10-words or less this evening.

The scary thing about all of this is that in the reply from ECC, they mention "ECC-Net wants to encourage consumers to shop online. ... Our annual report ... hopefully facilitates a debate on how the European online marketplace can be made safer and therefore more attractive to potential online shoppers".

A laudible objective, but I don't think the penny really dropped that the headline in the press release, carried on at least two radio shows unchallenged, has probably had the opposite effect.  How many potential online shoppers are having second thoughts having listened to RTE this morning and having missed Matt and Brendan this evening.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

Believe it or not, I had not seen the press release or noticed this thread. But the press release headline could not be any clearer:

*1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online, according to new ECC-Net Report *


 When the researcher told me today they wanted to discuss the headline from the Examiner, I immediately knew that it must be wrong. I read the ECC report in a few minutes and it was genuinely misleading. I was very anxious to dismiss the notion that online shopping was not safe so I asked Matt to make sure to mention this headline. 

Brendan


----------



## ubiquitous (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

This press release is an absolute disgrace. The worst thing about it is the sentence "*As in 2003 and 2004,* 1 out of 3 goods on average did not arrive to consumers who bought online.", implying that this is the third year in succession that this error has been made.  

If the ECC has so badly misled the public not once but three times on such an important issue, then we must conclude that they are either very incompetent or very careless. If we cannot depend on their work being presented properly, then they should be abolished or at the very least, heads should roll at the highest level.

Does anyone know to whom, if anyone, they are accountable or answerable?


----------



## nt00deep (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

From www.eccdublin.ie



> The ECC is co funded by the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs and the European Commission.


----------



## ajapale (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*

Im surprised they still havent acted to correct the headline.

I believe consumer advocates should be vocal and proactive (as well as being accurate). I enjoy Tina Leonard's (manager, ECC Dublin) radio shows and have posted here about them in the past.

Unless Im mistaken Tina Leonard shared a platform withe Brendan recently on the Matt Cooper show?



> About Us
> ECC Dublin provides free and confidential information on consumer rights in the EU and assists consumers with cross-border disputes.  The Centre is a member of the European Consumer Centre Network.
> 
> The Centre is *based * at 13A Upper O'Connell Street, Dublin 1.  The *phone*  line (01 8090600) is open to the public from Monday to Friday between 9.30am and 1pm.  Our *fax * number is 01 8090601 and you can *email*  us at info@eccdublin.ie
> ...


----------



## ubiquitous (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online*



			
				ajapale said:
			
		

> Im surprised they still havent acted to correct the headline.



Note that the headline on this thread (as it currently stands) is equally incorrect & misleading!


----------



## nt00deep (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: 1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

Well spotted ubiquitous.  I hadn't discovered the ability to amend a thread title until now.

I don't expect a correction to the ECC press release any time soon though.


----------



## Binomial (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

If you download the pressrelease and open the document in word and then click file>properties it is possible to see the initials of the person who wrote the misleading headline. Then again the pressrelease is signed by its author.


----------



## podgerodge (21 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

I emailed the author and asked if she would like to post her comments here.


----------



## podgerodge (22 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

Got a reply from Mary Denise O'Reilly of the ECC.  

"Thank you for updating me on the discussion taking place on
www.askaboutmoney.com. We would be delighted to make a comment on this
site and will do so in due course"


----------



## Dearg Doom (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

This daft headline has been reproduced verbatim in the Westmeath Weekend free newspaper. Well done to the ECC on spreading FUD on on-line commerce. This sort of [broken link removed] consumers can do without, thank you very much.


----------



## ajapale (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

Is there any trade association which represents on line traders in Ireland or Europe?


----------



## ajapale (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

In fairness to the Irish Office the misleading statement seems to derive from the [broken link removed] (pdf format).



> 5.3 Type of problem
> Every e-commerce complaint and dispute that is reported to an ECC office is registered and categorised.
> The ECC registration form contains numerous categories for the different types of problems that consumers experience. There are 8 main categories, with a further 36 sub-categories.
> The main categories, as they appear in the ECC registration form, are problems relating to:
> ...



The following uk website also points to the inaccurate headline which must have appeared europe wide:

http://www.out-law.com/page-7024.



> The most common complaint received concerns the non-delivery of goods. Though the ECC has released a statement claiming that one in three items bought online fails to arrive, in fact the statistics say that 38% of the complaints received by the body relate to goods not received.


----------



## nt00deep (23 Jun 2006)

> In fairness to the Irish Office the misleading statement seems to derive from the [broken link removed]


 
In fairness, Irish Office were one of a few offices affiliated to ECC-NET that contributed to the report

In fairness, we all read it, and wondered what the heck are they on about.

No reason to let them off the hook. It is simply daft.


----------



## DWD (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*



			
				nt00deep said:
			
		

> That was the headline this morning on the radio, and I waited, and waited, and waited for the correction. It did not materialise.
> 
> Here is a snip from an email I sent to the European Consumer Centre asking for clarification on their press release and interview on Morning Ireland.
> 
> ...


----------



## DWD (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

Just visited ECC Dublin to see what all the fuss was about and just noticed that the full title of the press release is "*1 in 3 goods fail to arrive when shopping online, according to new ECC-Net Report *
" If this report is based on consumer complaints why is everyone so upset. I just dont get it after taking the time to read the press release


----------



## nt00deep (23 Jun 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*

DWD,

That is precisely the point.  The title is obscene.  The report is about complaints, and the conclusion extends the findings to all goods ordered online.

To repeat the figures ...
   318,000 consumers ordering online in Ireland.
   Press Release and the report suggest 1 in 3 goods do not arrive.
   That's > 100,000 dissatisfied customers.

The reality ...
   222 complaints in Ireland.
   75 relate to non-delivery
   50 of them were not charged for the non delivered goods.

So, the problem that the report is trying to highlight is small in the overall context of the order-online community.

If the title of the press release and the discussions on the radio referred to complaints only, then this thread would not have started.


----------



## ajapale (7 Jul 2006)

I notice that the ECC has yet to correct this outrageous headline.

aj


----------



## podgerodge (10 Jul 2006)

*Re: ECC misleading headline:1 in 3 goods DO NOT fail to arrive when shopping online*



			
				podgerodge said:
			
		

> Got a reply from Mary Denise O'Reilly of the ECC.
> 
> "Thank you for updating me on the discussion taking place on
> www.askaboutmoney.com. We would be delighted to make a comment on this
> site and will do so in due course"



I have emailed Mary Denise O'Reilly and asked her will she be commenting.


----------



## ajapale (11 Jul 2006)

In light of the ECC's (Dublin Office) failure to correct this headline does this cast doubt on other headlines and reports? Does it bring the entire agency into disrepute?

Does anyone know who regulates this agency? Is there an ombudsman or inspectorate who has oversight regarding the agency or can it do what it pleases?


----------



## nt00deep (11 Jul 2006)

> Does anyone know who regulates this agency?


 
Refer to earlier post


----------



## ajapale (11 Jul 2006)

There is an importation distinction between who regulates and who funds the agency.


----------



## CMCR (11 Jul 2006)

ajapale said:
			
		

> In light of the ECC's (Dublin Office) failure to correct this headline does this cast doubt on other headlines and reports?


 
Yes - I think so. Then again, this doesn't surprise me - I've come across a number of their Press Releases in the last few years which I believe weren't entirely accurate either.

On the other hand, the newspapers do the same thing all the time.


----------



## ClubMan (11 Jul 2006)

CMCR said:
			
		

> Yes - I think so. Then again, this doesn't surprise me - I've come across a number of their Press Releases in the last few years which I believe weren't entirely accurate either.
> 
> On the other hand, the newspapers do the same thing all the time.


 Probably because a lot of what passes for journalism is actually regurgitation of flawed and/or biased press releases especially when it comes to matters of personal finance, property etc. Just look at the newspaper property supplements for blatant examples of conflicts of interest (puff pieces on property whose developers advertise in the supplement) and lack of any critical editorial content.


----------



## podgerodge (12 Jul 2006)

ClubMan said:
			
		

> Probably because a lot of what passes for journalism is actually regurgitation of flawed and/or biased press releases especially when it comes to matters of personal finance, property etc. Just look at the newspaper property supplements for blatant examples of conflicts of interest (puff pieces on property whose developers advertise in the supplement) and lack of any critical editorial content.



Think you've put you're finger on it there Clubman, there seems to be no urge to be a journalist in the real sense of the word with everyday press releases.


----------



## ECC Dublin (12 Jul 2006)

Statement from the European Consumer Centre Dublin 12 July 2006 
It is not the intention of ECC Dublin to mislead consumers. In fact the Centre actively promotes awareness of consumer rights in Ireland and assists consumers with problems they may have with cross-border purchases. In relation to shopping online we have produced an information guide on consumer rights when shopping on the internet and we provide helpful tips and advice on www.eccdublin.ie. 

Over the past three years we have produced a report on the European online marketplace which is based on consumer complaints received by our Network. This Report is produced to highlight the problems facing consumers and encourage enforcement authorities to implement the relevant legislation and put rogue traders out of business. These actions, we believe, contribute favourably to making the online marketplace a safer place to shop. 

As our release stated, 380,000 Irish consumers shopped online in 2005. Complaints received by ECC Dublin and the ECC Network represent a very small portion of online shoppers’ experiences. Nevertheless, it is important that these problems are highlighted so that consumers can become more informed and make better decisions. After all, an empowered consumer is good for business, because they shop more and wisely.


----------



## dam099 (12 Jul 2006)

ECC Dublin said:
			
		

> Statement from the European Consumer Centre Dublin 12 July 2006
> It is not the intention of ECC Dublin to mislead consumers. In fact the Centre actively promotes awareness of consumer rights in Ireland and assists consumers with problems they may have with cross-border purchases. In relation to shopping online we have produced an information guide on consumer rights when shopping on the internet and we provide helpful tips and advice on www.eccdublin.ie.
> 
> Over the past three years we have produced a report on the European online marketplace which is based on consumer complaints received by our Network. This Report is produced to highlight the problems facing consumers and encourage enforcement authorities to implement the relevant legislation and put rogue traders out of business. These actions, we believe, contribute favourably to making the online marketplace a safer place to shop.
> ...


 
This statement seems vague to me. Is the ECC admitting the headline was misleading (albeit unintentionally)? If so why is it still on your website with the misleading headline [broken link removed]


----------



## HighFlier (12 Jul 2006)

ECC by their response are evading taking responsibility for a blatantly incorrect statement they made.

Regurgitating the facts of the article in the hope that this will divert attention from the howler won't wash on this site


----------



## ajapale (12 Jul 2006)

Hi ECC Dublin! and welcome to AAM.

Would you agree that the misleading headline brings your otherwise excellent organisation (and website) into disrepute?

Would you consider ammending the offending headline to:*

1 in 3 'shopping on line' complaints involve goods failing to arrive - according to new ECC-Net Report*

aj


----------



## ClubMan (12 Jul 2006)

More to the point - the publishing of inaccurate and exaggerated headlines/reports on consumer related issues is likely to cause some (many?) to dismiss the publisher as cranks and ignore them thereafter. Of course there will be a section of the public who will take them at face value and consider it more grist to their "rip off Ireland" mill which doesn't help focus on the real consumer issues and rip-offs either. Consumer awareness campaigning should be based on factual information not sensationalist and exaggerated headlines and should address the real consumer/rip-off issues.


----------



## euroDilbert (12 Jul 2006)

And, of course to compound the problem, this article is being reported elsewhere, without any sanity checking or editing :

E.g. on the Enterprise Ireland website  it states :

_"The Network encountered three main problems when shopping online in the EU: one in three goods were never delivered"_ etc. etc.


----------



## ClubMan (12 Jul 2006)

Oh dear 


> [FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]


----------



## JamesFlynn (12 Jul 2006)

Dear ECC,

The headline is simply wrong, and your failure to correct it suggests: 

  1. There's no-one in your office who understands basic math.
  2. You know the headline is wrong and don't care.
  3. You're all on vacation and will correct it when you get back.

Let's hope it's number 3!

You need to address this issue, otherwise you're damaging the reputation of your office and your organization.  If you can release such a nonsense press release and not correct it when notified, how can you expect any credibility in the future?

James


----------



## Brendan Burgess (12 Jul 2006)

The ECC does great work in promoting consumer rights across Europe. 

They made a mistake in this press release. I have made mistakes before. I am sure that everyone contributing to this thread has made mistakes. 

This does not enhance their reputation and I agree that they should have simply and clearly acknowledged their error quickly and corrected it. Having said that, I don't see that there is much to be gained by hounding a good organization over one mistake. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (28 Nov 2006)

I am disappointed to see that this misleading headline is still on their [broken link removed]6 months later. 

Brendan


----------



## ajapale (13 Feb 2007)

Good News!

It looks like ECC-Dublin has finally got around to rectifying the offending incorrect article heading.

Unfortunately they still need to correct the heading in their 2006 archive [broken link removed]

[broken link removed](word doc download)


----------



## ajapale (20 Nov 2007)

Eighteen months and they still havent got around to fixing their 2006 archive:
[broken link removed]

Was there a 2007 version of the report?


----------



## ajapale (27 Mar 2010)

It seems the misleading headline is still rattling around their archive.

Did they ever apologise for the headline which was so blatantly wrong? pdf from their archive:
[broken link removed] 



> *PRESS RELEASE: MAY 29 Shopping online – 1 in 3 goods never arrives*
> MAY 29 – Third of online buys fail to arrive : The Irish Times, Laura Slattery
> – News at one with Sean O’Rourke
> – Spin FM
> ...


----------

