You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

September 15, 2022

How Thailand’s Consumer Protection Board Handles Consumer Complaints

In the course of our work, we often hear about consumers in Thailand lodging complaints with the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) about problems with a purchased product or service.

The OCPB is a government agency attached to the Office of the Prime Minister. Its main duties are to protect consumers in Thailand with respect to product advertising, product labeling, and contracts, and to handle consumer complaints.

However, there are exceptions to the types of consumer complaints that the OCPB can handle. This is because some consumer complaints must by law be handled by certain specialized agencies. Examples of these exceptions include consumer complaints relating to:

  • health products (food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, household dangerous substances, and narcotics);
  • medical services;
  • insurance;
  • pricing of consumer products;
  • condominium juristic person;
  • public land;
  • rail, water, and air transportation;
  • tourism;
  • education;
  • banking and finance;
  • telecommunications; and
  • electricity and water consumption.

Procedure

When a consumer complaint that the office can accept comes to the OCPB, the officers first consider whether the business operator has violated any laws, in which case the relevant authorities, such as the police, should handle the matter.

When the officers consider it appropriate, they may ask the parties to mediate the dispute. Complaints in Bangkok are mediated by officers at the Bangkok OCPB. For complaints lodged in other provinces, the governors of the provinces may assign officers or agencies under their supervision to mediate.

The OCPB can mediate twice within 90 days. If the parties still want to continue with the mediation, a subcommittee of the Consumer Protection Board (CPB)—the body that directs the OCPB—will then conduct two more mediation sessions within 90 days. If a resolution is still not reached, the subcommittee can conduct one additional mediation session before declaring the mediation failed and ending the complaint process. At this point, if the CPB determines that the case involves a matter of public interest (such as a case involving a product or service widely used by the public), the CPB could proceed with filing a case on behalf of the consumer. However, if the CPB declines to proceed in this manner, it would be up to the consumer to bring a case on his or her own.

If the mediation is successful, the officers then prepare a draft compromise agreement for the parties to review and sign. Upon conclusion of the agreement, the parties relinquish all prior relevant rights to make any claims against each other and agree to be bound instead by the terms of the compromise agreement. If a party does not comply with the terms, the CPB has the discretion to enforce the agreement.

If the mediation fails and the CPB believes that the business operator has violated the consumer’s rights or any laws, and that further proceedings would be beneficial to consumers as a whole, the CPB may appoint a public prosecutor or a legal officer to initiate civil or criminal actions against the business operator on behalf of the consumer.

Analysis

From our experience, OCPB mediation can be a useful tool for business operators to end the consumer disputes without having to risk costly and cumbersome criminal proceedings. The convenience and savings can be significant, as most OCPB mediations are now conducted via videoconferencing. However, physical meetings are still needed for the parties to sign the compromise agreement in front of the officers.

Overall, the OPCB mechanism for handling consumer complaints offers both consumers and providers of goods or services a way to resolve their disputes and reach a mutually agreeable settlement. Consumers can feel confident knowing that they have recourse if they run into a problem related to goods or services, and business owners can be assured that consumer complaints will be handled through an established process that will defend them from spurious claims while giving them a chance to rectify justified complaints without undue expense.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 19, 2021
Thailand has made significant changes to its statutory interest rate framework for the first time in almost a century. Since 1925, the statutory interest rate codified in Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code (the CCC) has remained at 7.5% per year. But with Covid-19 having an unprecedented impact on the Thai economy, the Thai Government, via emergency decree, has reduced the statutory rate. While the decree is largely aimed at providing relief to hard-hit SMEs and individual debtors, the amendments have broader implications for doing business in Thailand. Main Changes The new interest rate revisions are contained within the Emergency Decree Amending the Civil and Commercial Code B.E. 2564 (2021) (the Emergency Decree), which was published in the Government Gazette on April 10, 2021 and came into effect on April 11, 2021. The Emergency Decree amends Sections 7 and 224 of the CCC, which stated the previous statutory interest rate of 7.5% per year. The Emergency Decree makes three major changes. The first involves a reduction of the statutory interest rate from 7.5% per year to 3% per year in Section 7. The new 3% annual rate is subject to review every three years by the Ministry of Finance. The interest rate is subject to further change later by a royal decree. The second change concerns money debts under Section 224 of the CCC. The previous version of Section 224 stated, among other things, that a money debt based on a default bears interest of 7.5% per year. Under the Emergency Decree, the new actual statutory default interest rate is the statutory interest rate stated in Section 7 with an additional rate of 2% per year. The result is a 5% annual statutory default interest rate. Since the statutory default interest rate is based in part on the Section 7
March 4, 2021
E-commerce platforms have become some of the most significant marketplaces in Thailand, with millions of daily business transactions and huge numbers of online users. The increasing number of online shops operating on e-commerce platforms requires new techniques to be employed in online IP rights infringement cases. Both the private sector and the government have developed tools to enhance online IP enforcement, including ones using the latest legal technologies and artificial intelligence (AI). Many legal technologies and AI operations are still nascent and typically do not yet offer the best approach for online IP rights enforcement. For example, AI and other technologies available today are still unable to consistently differentiate between original and counterfeit products from the images and information displayed on the e-commerce platforms and the internet. Therefore, some of the most effective measures for online IP enforcement still involve manual online searches by experienced local investigators with deep understanding of the behaviors of local users (both sellers and buyers) and the ability to link relevant information across online platforms. Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), as the governmental office responsible for IP-related matters in Thailand, has initiated its new Memorandum of Understanding on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights on the Internet. This memorandum of understanding (MOU) does not create additional rights for IP owners, but acts as a mechanism to gather all the relevant stakeholders to address issues related to online IP infringement in a unified, mutually agreeable manner. The signatories of the MOU fall into four categories: Governmental authorities: DIP, Department of Business Development, and Department of International Trade Promotion; E-commerce platform operators: Lazada, Shopee, and JD Central (the most popular e-commerce platforms in Thailand); IP rights holders: Particularly including trademark owners facing ongoing counterfeiting problems in Thailand; and Law firms. Although the MOU is not