Monday September 12 2005

First aid kits seller guilty of misrepresentation (Bradley Norrish)

Filed under: Bradley Norrish — Josh @ 9:41 pm

Bradley Norrish has been found guilty of mispresentation for his first aid kit scam.


” …

Issue Date: – Monday, 12 September 2005
First aid kits seller guilty of misrepresentation

A promoter of mail order first aid kits has been found guilty of falsely implying his company had approval of the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection.

Today the Perth Magistrates Court fined Bradley Stedman Norrish of Forrest Street, East Perth and his company Employment Protection Australia Pty Ltd a total of $14,200 with total costs of $4,525.

Mr Norrish was found guilty of two breaches of the Fair Trading Act for implying his company had approval of the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection, and falsely representing that his first aid kits were compulsory. His company, Employment Protection Australia Pty Ltd, was found guilty of four breaches of the Fair Trading Act and one breach of the Consumer Affairs Act for similar misrepresentations.

Consumer Protection took action against Mr Norrish after he sent out about 20,000 unsolicited letters to small businesses and community groups in Western Australia, with the aim of selling first aid kits priced at $259.

The letters were headed “Employment Protection Australia” and included a logo of Australia with the characters “EPA”. The letters informed recipients that it was “now required by law that all employers and workplaces have an occupational safety and health compliant first aid supply”.

During its investigation into Mr Norrish’s activities last year, Consumer Protection intercepted letters held in a PO Box ready for collection and found 96 letters with money orders totalling $26,806.

“These letters were clearly aimed at duping small businesses and community groups into parting with their money,” Consumer Protection Commissioner Patrick Walker said.

“By using the name “Employment Protection Australia” and the logo which contained the letters “EPA”, many recipients believed they were dealing with a government agency and were required to buy the first aid kits.”

State Government Occupational Safety and Health Regulations require all workplaces to have comprehensive first aid materials that comply with legislation.

“The first aid materials must be suitable for the particular workplace,” Mr Walker said. “To suggest any first aid kit would suit all workplaces is blatantly misleading.”

Telephone 1300 30 40 54 or email

… “

Sunday September 11 2005

Probe into competition (Bradley Norrish + Michael Shorthill)

Filed under: Bradley Norrish — Josh @ 7:05 pm

Perth’s Sunday Times has run a story on the “Win a Plasma HDTV promotion” and refers to Bradley Norrish, without specifically naming him.

Probe into competition,7034,16560480%5E2761,00.html

” …


AN internet competition offering a television as a prize has run foul of WA authorities.

After an investigation by The Sunday Times, the Gaming and Wagering Commission has begun an inquiry into the competition, which one online activist described as a “money-grubbing scam.”

The Department of Consumer and Employment Protection has also assigned one of its investigators to look into the competition.

The competition is being run from a post office box in Wanneroo and has links to a man with a history of trying to dupe consumers.

Internet users are automatically directed to the competition when they visit sites such as and

The “Plasma HDTV Promotion” website asks entrants to provide their names and email addresses and also sign for a premium-rate SMS service to receive a weekly horoscope.

The promotion website says the horoscope costs $2.50 a month, but the fine print says the amount can be increased at the promoter’s discretion up to $30 a month.

Competition promoter Sprite Multimedia said the competition was a trade promotion. “(It) abides by the law entirely,” said Sprite’s Mark Turner.

“A full copy of the terms and conditions has been submitted to the Gaming and Wagering Commission.”

But the commission’s David Helge said calls by The Sunday Times had prompted an investigation into the competition.

Mr Helge said he was confident Sprite’s competition was a bona fide trade promotion, despite the manufacturer of the television not wanting any association with the competition. Sprite started the competition on August 1, but only contacted the commission with its terms and conditions nine days later.

Mr Helge said the commission would contact Edith Cowan University and Philips after they expressed concerns about the competition to The Sunday Times.

Telephone numbers on domain registration details for the competition website belong to Edith Cowan University.

“ECU has no involvement in this practice and has given no one permission to use these numbers,” an ECU spokesman said.

Manufacturer Philips told The Sunday Times it believed the competition was trying to use its name “to add legitimacy to a website with questionable motives”.

“We were not happy that a Philips product was used in this way, especially as the website itself looks extremely dubious in my opinion,” Philips’ David Wolf said.

Online activist Josh Rowe said Sprite’s competition was preying on the naivety of entrants and that he had lodged a complaint about it with DOCEP.

Mr Rowe’s watchdog website, domainwatch, claims the premium-rate SMS number used by Sprite prompts entrants to re-enter their numbers.

Another online watchdog, Blast Radius, described the competition as a “money-grubbing scam”.

The SMS number has a troubled history and links Sprite to a man who was taken to court last month by Consumer and Employment Protection over dozens of alleged breaches of the Fair Trading Act.

A decision on the case is due tomorrow.

… “

Disclaimer: The page has been developed using publicly available information. While due care has been exercised to ensure the accuracy and currency of the material contained on this web page, the editor strongly recommends that users exercise their own skill and care with respect to its use and seek professional advice where appropriate. While the information provided is considered to be true and correct at the date of publication, changes in circumstances after the time of publication may impact on the accuracy of the information. The editor will consider requests to correct factual errors if accompanied by reasonable proof of the error(s). © Copyright 2001-2005 - Josh Rowe - - Powered by WordPress