Procon-SP fined 11.4 million R$ on XP Group brokers for practices and clauses considered abusive. The fines were R$8.2 million on XP Investimentos, R$2.6 million on Clear and R$620,000 on Ricoh. Companies can still appeal.
Consumers have made complaints asking about the fact that in the event of a malfunction or instability on the XP site, an additional fee will have to be paid to complete the process. According to Procon, this practice is abusive and illegal, because it transfers to the consumer the cost of a problem with the service provided by the company.
Offensive clauses were also found in the nodes used by XP and its brokers, which absolved them of liability for problems that might occur in the provision of services or in their trading systems. This, according to Procon, violates Section 51 of the CDC (Consumer Protection Act).
In a note to UOLXP Group stated that it “values the quality of service and transparency in its relationship with its customers, and has been honored at some of the most important awards in the country, such as the Top of Mind and Reclame Aqui Award.” The company said it would appeal.
To the CEO of Procon-SPFernando keps” XP cannot waive its obligation to compensate the customer in the event of any problem. Any provision that relieves the supplier of liability is considered unfair. The company has to respect consumer protection law.”
In addition, according to him, the XP It adopts in its contracts the possibility of unilateral change of conditions, as well as a clause that prevents consumers who live outside the state of São Paulo from exercising the right of litigation in the jurisdiction of their place of residence. This practice puts some clients at a disadvantage.
Write to the information
In the specific case of Rico Corretora, the problem, according to Procon, is that the company only allows access to the contract if the customer signs up on their website and opens an account (with login and password) — which conflicts with Code Consumer protection, which Defines the company’s obligation to provide clear and accurate information when providing and providing its services.
According to Procon, Clear Corretora “does not respect the right to obtain information provided by law by not providing sufficient information on its website about costs incurred in transactions made by consumers.”
“XP cannot require the consumer to access contract features that are offered only after the account is opened; this violates consumer protection law. The customer has the right to know what contract rules he will abide by, the publicity must be clear and ostensible,” says Keps.
“Hardcore beer fanatic. Falls down a lot. Professional coffee fan. Music ninja.”