PJ
Peter J
1 reviews | Active since May 2012
08 Jan 2026, 11:51
Makro False Advertising R36Max & Suppressing Customer Reviews - Consumer Protection Act Violation
I purchased what Makro advertised as an "R36Max" handheld gaming console. The product I received was NOT the Max version as clearly advertised on their website and in-store materials. When I contacted Makro customer care to resolve this false advertising issue, I was met with complete indifference. The customer service representative refused to escalate my complaint to the appropriate department, instead telling me it was MY responsibility to phone around and find the right person to speak to. This is not customer care - this is customer abandonment. The Most Concerning Issue: Makro solicits customers to submit product reviews, but they DO NOT PUBLISH negative reviews. This means they are actively suppressing truthful consumer feedback about products while continuing to falsely advertise them. This makes Makro an accomplice in deceiving other consumers, not just a negligent retailer. By hiding reviews that would warn other customers about receiving the wrong product, Makro is knowingly participating in ongoing consumer *****. Actions Taken:
Sent formal legal notice citing Consumer Protection Act violations - NO RESPONSE Customer care refused to help, told me to find someone myself Filed formal complaint with National Consumer Commission Filed application with National Consumer Tribunal Reporting to all consumer protection platforms
Consumer Protection Act Violations:
Section 41: False, misleading and deceptive representations Section 43: Bait marketing Section 14: Failure to deal fairly, reasonably and equitably with consumers
What I Want:
The R36Max product as advertised OR full refund Makro to stop falsely advertising this product Makro to publish ALL customer reviews, not just positive ones Compensation for time, costs and inconvenience An apology for deceptive trade practices
Warning to Other Consumers: If you see Makro advertising an "R36Max" gaming console, be warned - you will likely receive a standard R36, not the Max version. And if you complain, they will ignore you and hide your review from other potential buyers. Check your consumer rights under the Consumer Protection Act. You are entitled to receive exactly what is advertised, and retailers cannot suppress reviews to hide their false advertising. Update: Legal proceedings ongoing. Will update as case progresses. Do not accept false advertising. Know your rights. Demand what you were promised or a full refund.
Helpful (0)
Replies (2)0
Replies (2)PJ
Peter J's updateReviewer Update
08 Jan 2026, 13:11Dear Makro Social Media Team,
Thank you for your response, however, you continue to completely ignore the substantive legal violations I have raised.
This is NOT about one dissatisfied customer wanting a return.
This is about Makro's systematic deception of consumers through:
ONGOING FALSE ADVERTISING: Your website STILL advertises this product as "R36Max" TODAY. A refund to me does nothing to stop you from deceiving the next customer, and the next, and the next.
REVIEW SUPPRESSION: Makro solicited my review of this product but DID NOT PUBLISH IT. You are actively hiding truthful consumer feedback from other shoppers while continuing to falsely advertise the product. This makes you complicit in ongoing consumer *****.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS: Your practices violate sections 41, 43, and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. These violations do not disappear because you offer one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others.
Your Pattern of Non-Response:
Initial complaint: Customer care refused to help, told me to find someone myself
Formal legal notice: NO RESPONSE
First email offer of return: Ignored all substantive issues
48-hour deadline: NO RESPONSE
Now HelloPeter: Same inadequate "just return it" response
What You Are Really Saying:
"We will refund you to make you go away, but we will continue falsely advertising this product and suppressing reviews so we can deceive other consumers tomorrow."
That is Not Acceptable.
What is Required BEFORE Any Return:
STOP falsely advertising the R36Max - correct ALL product listings NOW
PUBLISH all suppressed customer reviews about this product
Written acknowledgment that Makro engaged in false advertising and review suppression
Compensation for my time and costs dealing with your deceptive practices
Commitment to policy changes preventing future review suppression
Legal Proceedings Continue:
National Consumer Commission complaint: ACTIVE
National Consumer Tribunal application: FILED
Massmart Holdings executive management: ESCALATED (72-hour deadline pending)
Consumer advocacy media: CONTACTED
These proceedings will continue regardless of any refund, because the public interest requires that your systematic deceptive trade practices be stopped and publicly exposed.
To Other HelloPeter Users:
Notice that Makro has responded THREE TIMES now, and every single time they ignore the core issues: ongoing false advertising and deliberate review suppression. They want to refund one customer while continuing to deceive others.
This is how systematic consumer deception works. Silence the complainers with refunds while continuing the ***** against everyone else.
Do not fall for products advertised as "R36Max" at Makro. Check if YOUR negative reviews have been suppressed. Know your rights under the Consumer Protection Act.
Makro: You have 72 hours to provide a substantive response to Massmart Holdings executive management addressing all violations raised. Your social media team's repeated failure to address these issues is now documented evidence of corporate-level disregard for consumer protection laws.
Peter Jacops
Thank you for your response, however, you continue to completely ignore the substantive legal violations I have raised.
This is NOT about one dissatisfied customer wanting a return.
This is about Makro's systematic deception of consumers through:
ONGOING FALSE ADVERTISING: Your website STILL advertises this product as "R36Max" TODAY. A refund to me does nothing to stop you from deceiving the next customer, and the next, and the next.
REVIEW SUPPRESSION: Makro solicited my review of this product but DID NOT PUBLISH IT. You are actively hiding truthful consumer feedback from other shoppers while continuing to falsely advertise the product. This makes you complicit in ongoing consumer *****.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS: Your practices violate sections 41, 43, and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. These violations do not disappear because you offer one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others.
Your Pattern of Non-Response:
Initial complaint: Customer care refused to help, told me to find someone myself
Formal legal notice: NO RESPONSE
First email offer of return: Ignored all substantive issues
48-hour deadline: NO RESPONSE
Now HelloPeter: Same inadequate "just return it" response
What You Are Really Saying:
"We will refund you to make you go away, but we will continue falsely advertising this product and suppressing reviews so we can deceive other consumers tomorrow."
That is Not Acceptable.
What is Required BEFORE Any Return:
STOP falsely advertising the R36Max - correct ALL product listings NOW
PUBLISH all suppressed customer reviews about this product
Written acknowledgment that Makro engaged in false advertising and review suppression
Compensation for my time and costs dealing with your deceptive practices
Commitment to policy changes preventing future review suppression
Legal Proceedings Continue:
National Consumer Commission complaint: ACTIVE
National Consumer Tribunal application: FILED
Massmart Holdings executive management: ESCALATED (72-hour deadline pending)
Consumer advocacy media: CONTACTED
These proceedings will continue regardless of any refund, because the public interest requires that your systematic deceptive trade practices be stopped and publicly exposed.
To Other HelloPeter Users:
Notice that Makro has responded THREE TIMES now, and every single time they ignore the core issues: ongoing false advertising and deliberate review suppression. They want to refund one customer while continuing to deceive others.
This is how systematic consumer deception works. Silence the complainers with refunds while continuing the ***** against everyone else.
Do not fall for products advertised as "R36Max" at Makro. Check if YOUR negative reviews have been suppressed. Know your rights under the Consumer Protection Act.
Makro: You have 72 hours to provide a substantive response to Massmart Holdings executive management addressing all violations raised. Your social media team's repeated failure to address these issues is now documented evidence of corporate-level disregard for consumer protection laws.
Peter Jacops
PJ
Peter J's update08 Jan 2026, 13:11
Reviewer Update
Dear Makro Social Media Team,
Thank you for your response, however, you continue to completely ignore the substantive legal violations I have raised.
This is NOT about one dissatisfied customer wanting a return.
This is about Makro's systematic deception of consumers through:
ONGOING FALSE ADVERTISING: Your website STILL advertises this product as "R36Max" TODAY. A refund to me does nothing to stop you from deceiving the next customer, and the next, and the next.
REVIEW SUPPRESSION: Makro solicited my review of this product but DID NOT PUBLISH IT. You are actively hiding truthful consumer feedback from other shoppers while continuing to falsely advertise the product. This makes you complicit in ongoing consumer *****.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS: Your practices violate sections 41, 43, and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. These violations do not disappear because you offer one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others.
Your Pattern of Non-Response:
Initial complaint: Customer care refused to help, told me to find someone myself
Formal legal notice: NO RESPONSE
First email offer of return: Ignored all substantive issues
48-hour deadline: NO RESPONSE
Now HelloPeter: Same inadequate "just return it" response
What You Are Really Saying:
"We will refund you to make you go away, but we will continue falsely advertising this product and suppressing reviews so we can deceive other consumers tomorrow."
That is Not Acceptable.
What is Required BEFORE Any Return:
STOP falsely advertising the R36Max - correct ALL product listings NOW
PUBLISH all suppressed customer reviews about this product
Written acknowledgment that Makro engaged in false advertising and review suppression
Compensation for my time and costs dealing with your deceptive practices
Commitment to policy changes preventing future review suppression
Legal Proceedings Continue:
National Consumer Commission complaint: ACTIVE
National Consumer Tribunal application: FILED
Massmart Holdings executive management: ESCALATED (72-hour deadline pending)
Consumer advocacy media: CONTACTED
These proceedings will continue regardless of any refund, because the public interest requires that your systematic deceptive trade practices be stopped and publicly exposed.
To Other HelloPeter Users:
Notice that Makro has responded THREE TIMES now, and every single time they ignore the core issues: ongoing false advertising and deliberate review suppression. They want to refund one customer while continuing to deceive others.
This is how systematic consumer deception works. Silence the complainers with refunds while continuing the ***** against everyone else.
Do not fall for products advertised as "R36Max" at Makro. Check if YOUR negative reviews have been suppressed. Know your rights under the Consumer Protection Act.
Makro: You have 72 hours to provide a substantive response to Massmart Holdings executive management addressing all violations raised. Your social media team's repeated failure to address these issues is now documented evidence of corporate-level disregard for consumer protection laws.
Peter Jacops
Thank you for your response, however, you continue to completely ignore the substantive legal violations I have raised.
This is NOT about one dissatisfied customer wanting a return.
This is about Makro's systematic deception of consumers through:
ONGOING FALSE ADVERTISING: Your website STILL advertises this product as "R36Max" TODAY. A refund to me does nothing to stop you from deceiving the next customer, and the next, and the next.
REVIEW SUPPRESSION: Makro solicited my review of this product but DID NOT PUBLISH IT. You are actively hiding truthful consumer feedback from other shoppers while continuing to falsely advertise the product. This makes you complicit in ongoing consumer *****.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT VIOLATIONS: Your practices violate sections 41, 43, and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. These violations do not disappear because you offer one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others.
Your Pattern of Non-Response:
Initial complaint: Customer care refused to help, told me to find someone myself
Formal legal notice: NO RESPONSE
First email offer of return: Ignored all substantive issues
48-hour deadline: NO RESPONSE
Now HelloPeter: Same inadequate "just return it" response
What You Are Really Saying:
"We will refund you to make you go away, but we will continue falsely advertising this product and suppressing reviews so we can deceive other consumers tomorrow."
That is Not Acceptable.
What is Required BEFORE Any Return:
STOP falsely advertising the R36Max - correct ALL product listings NOW
PUBLISH all suppressed customer reviews about this product
Written acknowledgment that Makro engaged in false advertising and review suppression
Compensation for my time and costs dealing with your deceptive practices
Commitment to policy changes preventing future review suppression
Legal Proceedings Continue:
National Consumer Commission complaint: ACTIVE
National Consumer Tribunal application: FILED
Massmart Holdings executive management: ESCALATED (72-hour deadline pending)
Consumer advocacy media: CONTACTED
These proceedings will continue regardless of any refund, because the public interest requires that your systematic deceptive trade practices be stopped and publicly exposed.
To Other HelloPeter Users:
Notice that Makro has responded THREE TIMES now, and every single time they ignore the core issues: ongoing false advertising and deliberate review suppression. They want to refund one customer while continuing to deceive others.
This is how systematic consumer deception works. Silence the complainers with refunds while continuing the ***** against everyone else.
Do not fall for products advertised as "R36Max" at Makro. Check if YOUR negative reviews have been suppressed. Know your rights under the Consumer Protection Act.
Makro: You have 72 hours to provide a substantive response to Massmart Holdings executive management addressing all violations raised. Your social media team's repeated failure to address these issues is now documented evidence of corporate-level disregard for consumer protection laws.
Peter Jacops
PJ
Peter J's updateReviewer Update
08 Jan 2026, 15:04Dear Makro Social Media Team,
Your statement "we are unable to assist you further should a return not be logged" perfectly demonstrates why legal action against Makro is necessary and justified.
You Are Not Being Asked to "Assist Me Further"
You are being required to comply with the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, which is not optional, not negotiable, and not dependent on whether I log a return.
Your Legal Obligations Do Not Disappear Because I Refuse Your Inadequate Solution
The Consumer Protection Act does not say "retailers must stop false advertising IF the customer agrees to a return." Your legal obligations exist regardless of my choices.
Your Statement Reveals Corporate Policy:
"We are unable to assist unless you accept our terms" translates to: "We will only address Consumer Protection Act violations if you agree to go away quietly."
That is Not How Consumer Law Works.
What You Have Just Admitted On Public Record:
You notified your supplier team about the "incorrect product" - confirming you KNOW the product being advertised as R36Max is NOT the Max version
Despite this knowledge, your website STILL advertises it as "R36Max" TODAY - this is KNOWING false advertising, not a mistake
You refuse to correct the false advertising unless customers accept your return offer
You refuse to publish suppressed reviews warning other consumers
You consider your legal obligations fulfilled by offering one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others
This Makes It Worse, Not Better.
You have now publicly confirmed that Makro:
KNOWS the product is incorrectly advertised
CONTINUES to advertise it falsely anyway
REFUSES to correct it unless customers comply with your demands
Is DELIBERATELY deceiving consumers, not negligently
Consumer Protection Act Section 41:
Makes it ******* to falsely advertise products. There is no exception saying "unless the customer refuses a return."
Consumer Protection Act Section 14:
Requires you to deal fairly, reasonably and equitably with consumers. Conditional compliance ("we will only follow the law if you do what we say") is the opposite of fair dealing.
What Happens Now:
Your public admission that you KNOW the product is incorrectly supp**** while CONTINUING to advertise it falsely has been screenshot and will be submitted as evidence to:
National Consumer Commission - showing KNOWING violation
National Consumer Tribunal - showing DELIBERATE deception
Massmart Holdings executive management - showing compliance failure
Consumer advocacy media - showing corporate disregard for consumer protection
Your "supplier team" notification is irrelevant. You are the retailer. You are responsible for your adverti*****ts. You are responsible for what you sell. You cannot blame suppliers for YOUR false advertising on YOUR website that YOU control.
To HelloPeter Community:
Makro has just publicly stated they will not comply with consumer protection laws unless you accept their conditions. They have admitted they KNOW the product is wrong but continue advertising it falsely anyway.
This is exactly why the Consumer Protection Act exists - to prevent retailers from making compliance conditional on customer submission.
Legal proceedings continue. This response has strengthened the case significantly.
Your statement "we are unable to assist you further should a return not be logged" perfectly demonstrates why legal action against Makro is necessary and justified.
You Are Not Being Asked to "Assist Me Further"
You are being required to comply with the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, which is not optional, not negotiable, and not dependent on whether I log a return.
Your Legal Obligations Do Not Disappear Because I Refuse Your Inadequate Solution
The Consumer Protection Act does not say "retailers must stop false advertising IF the customer agrees to a return." Your legal obligations exist regardless of my choices.
Your Statement Reveals Corporate Policy:
"We are unable to assist unless you accept our terms" translates to: "We will only address Consumer Protection Act violations if you agree to go away quietly."
That is Not How Consumer Law Works.
What You Have Just Admitted On Public Record:
You notified your supplier team about the "incorrect product" - confirming you KNOW the product being advertised as R36Max is NOT the Max version
Despite this knowledge, your website STILL advertises it as "R36Max" TODAY - this is KNOWING false advertising, not a mistake
You refuse to correct the false advertising unless customers accept your return offer
You refuse to publish suppressed reviews warning other consumers
You consider your legal obligations fulfilled by offering one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others
This Makes It Worse, Not Better.
You have now publicly confirmed that Makro:
KNOWS the product is incorrectly advertised
CONTINUES to advertise it falsely anyway
REFUSES to correct it unless customers comply with your demands
Is DELIBERATELY deceiving consumers, not negligently
Consumer Protection Act Section 41:
Makes it ******* to falsely advertise products. There is no exception saying "unless the customer refuses a return."
Consumer Protection Act Section 14:
Requires you to deal fairly, reasonably and equitably with consumers. Conditional compliance ("we will only follow the law if you do what we say") is the opposite of fair dealing.
What Happens Now:
Your public admission that you KNOW the product is incorrectly supp**** while CONTINUING to advertise it falsely has been screenshot and will be submitted as evidence to:
National Consumer Commission - showing KNOWING violation
National Consumer Tribunal - showing DELIBERATE deception
Massmart Holdings executive management - showing compliance failure
Consumer advocacy media - showing corporate disregard for consumer protection
Your "supplier team" notification is irrelevant. You are the retailer. You are responsible for your adverti*****ts. You are responsible for what you sell. You cannot blame suppliers for YOUR false advertising on YOUR website that YOU control.
To HelloPeter Community:
Makro has just publicly stated they will not comply with consumer protection laws unless you accept their conditions. They have admitted they KNOW the product is wrong but continue advertising it falsely anyway.
This is exactly why the Consumer Protection Act exists - to prevent retailers from making compliance conditional on customer submission.
Legal proceedings continue. This response has strengthened the case significantly.
PJ
Peter J's update08 Jan 2026, 15:04
Reviewer Update
Dear Makro Social Media Team,
Your statement "we are unable to assist you further should a return not be logged" perfectly demonstrates why legal action against Makro is necessary and justified.
You Are Not Being Asked to "Assist Me Further"
You are being required to comply with the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, which is not optional, not negotiable, and not dependent on whether I log a return.
Your Legal Obligations Do Not Disappear Because I Refuse Your Inadequate Solution
The Consumer Protection Act does not say "retailers must stop false advertising IF the customer agrees to a return." Your legal obligations exist regardless of my choices.
Your Statement Reveals Corporate Policy:
"We are unable to assist unless you accept our terms" translates to: "We will only address Consumer Protection Act violations if you agree to go away quietly."
That is Not How Consumer Law Works.
What You Have Just Admitted On Public Record:
You notified your supplier team about the "incorrect product" - confirming you KNOW the product being advertised as R36Max is NOT the Max version
Despite this knowledge, your website STILL advertises it as "R36Max" TODAY - this is KNOWING false advertising, not a mistake
You refuse to correct the false advertising unless customers accept your return offer
You refuse to publish suppressed reviews warning other consumers
You consider your legal obligations fulfilled by offering one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others
This Makes It Worse, Not Better.
You have now publicly confirmed that Makro:
KNOWS the product is incorrectly advertised
CONTINUES to advertise it falsely anyway
REFUSES to correct it unless customers comply with your demands
Is DELIBERATELY deceiving consumers, not negligently
Consumer Protection Act Section 41:
Makes it ******* to falsely advertise products. There is no exception saying "unless the customer refuses a return."
Consumer Protection Act Section 14:
Requires you to deal fairly, reasonably and equitably with consumers. Conditional compliance ("we will only follow the law if you do what we say") is the opposite of fair dealing.
What Happens Now:
Your public admission that you KNOW the product is incorrectly supp**** while CONTINUING to advertise it falsely has been screenshot and will be submitted as evidence to:
National Consumer Commission - showing KNOWING violation
National Consumer Tribunal - showing DELIBERATE deception
Massmart Holdings executive management - showing compliance failure
Consumer advocacy media - showing corporate disregard for consumer protection
Your "supplier team" notification is irrelevant. You are the retailer. You are responsible for your adverti*****ts. You are responsible for what you sell. You cannot blame suppliers for YOUR false advertising on YOUR website that YOU control.
To HelloPeter Community:
Makro has just publicly stated they will not comply with consumer protection laws unless you accept their conditions. They have admitted they KNOW the product is wrong but continue advertising it falsely anyway.
This is exactly why the Consumer Protection Act exists - to prevent retailers from making compliance conditional on customer submission.
Legal proceedings continue. This response has strengthened the case significantly.
Your statement "we are unable to assist you further should a return not be logged" perfectly demonstrates why legal action against Makro is necessary and justified.
You Are Not Being Asked to "Assist Me Further"
You are being required to comply with the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, which is not optional, not negotiable, and not dependent on whether I log a return.
Your Legal Obligations Do Not Disappear Because I Refuse Your Inadequate Solution
The Consumer Protection Act does not say "retailers must stop false advertising IF the customer agrees to a return." Your legal obligations exist regardless of my choices.
Your Statement Reveals Corporate Policy:
"We are unable to assist unless you accept our terms" translates to: "We will only address Consumer Protection Act violations if you agree to go away quietly."
That is Not How Consumer Law Works.
What You Have Just Admitted On Public Record:
You notified your supplier team about the "incorrect product" - confirming you KNOW the product being advertised as R36Max is NOT the Max version
Despite this knowledge, your website STILL advertises it as "R36Max" TODAY - this is KNOWING false advertising, not a mistake
You refuse to correct the false advertising unless customers accept your return offer
You refuse to publish suppressed reviews warning other consumers
You consider your legal obligations fulfilled by offering one customer a refund while continuing to deceive others
This Makes It Worse, Not Better.
You have now publicly confirmed that Makro:
KNOWS the product is incorrectly advertised
CONTINUES to advertise it falsely anyway
REFUSES to correct it unless customers comply with your demands
Is DELIBERATELY deceiving consumers, not negligently
Consumer Protection Act Section 41:
Makes it ******* to falsely advertise products. There is no exception saying "unless the customer refuses a return."
Consumer Protection Act Section 14:
Requires you to deal fairly, reasonably and equitably with consumers. Conditional compliance ("we will only follow the law if you do what we say") is the opposite of fair dealing.
What Happens Now:
Your public admission that you KNOW the product is incorrectly supp**** while CONTINUING to advertise it falsely has been screenshot and will be submitted as evidence to:
National Consumer Commission - showing KNOWING violation
National Consumer Tribunal - showing DELIBERATE deception
Massmart Holdings executive management - showing compliance failure
Consumer advocacy media - showing corporate disregard for consumer protection
Your "supplier team" notification is irrelevant. You are the retailer. You are responsible for your adverti*****ts. You are responsible for what you sell. You cannot blame suppliers for YOUR false advertising on YOUR website that YOU control.
To HelloPeter Community:
Makro has just publicly stated they will not comply with consumer protection laws unless you accept their conditions. They have admitted they KNOW the product is wrong but continue advertising it falsely anyway.
This is exactly why the Consumer Protection Act exists - to prevent retailers from making compliance conditional on customer submission.
Legal proceedings continue. This response has strengthened the case significantly.