#PriceFixing: Fire companies confess and get fined

File picture: Independent Media

File picture: Independent Media

Published Jun 26, 2017

Share

Johannesburg - The Competition Commission on Monday said two of the seve fire companies prosecuted for price fixing companies have admitted to have engaged in cartel conduct. They agreed to pay penalties and have undertaken to assist the Commission in the prosecution of the rest.

Fireco Gauteng (Fireco Gauteng) and Afrion

Property Services CC (Afrion), specialising in supplying, installing and

maintaining fire control and protection systems in South Africa and the

continent, have reached a settlement with the Commission.

In a statement, the Commission states that part of several

fire control and protection systems companies that were referred by the

Commission to the Competition Tribunal for prosecution in March this year. The

companies had fixed prices, divided markets and tendered collusively when

bidding for tenders to install fire control and protection systems in new and

existing buildings.

Read also:  DSTV admits to price fixing

Competition Commission spokesperson Sipho Ngwema said in

their respective settlement agreements, Fireco Gauteng and Afrion have admitted

that they engaged in price fixing, market division and collusive tendering in

contravention of the Competition Act. Fireco Gauteng has agreed to pay

administrative penalty of R909 000 while Afrion has agreed to pay R327 000.

“The two companies have also agreed to cooperate with the

Commission and assist it in the prosecution of the remaining respondents which

are Belfa, Cross Fire, Fire Protection Systems, Fireco and Tshwane Fire

Sprinklers.”

The Commission’s investigation found that from at least 1996

to 2015, the companies entered into an agreement and/or engaged in a concerted

practice to fix prices, divide markets and tendered collusively in relation to

tenders to install fire control and protection systems in new and existing

buildings.

Ngwema said the fire companies concluded bilateral and

multilateral collusive agreements which were implemented by exchanging cover

quotes, sharing of bills of quantities and exchanging of prices through

telephone, faxes, emails and occasional meetings. The companies had also agreed

to ‘respect’ each other’s allocated customers by not bidding competitively for

tenders issued by those customers.

BUSINESS REPORT ONLINE 

 

 

 

Related Topics: