Agricultural input supplier Nitro Phos Ltd discovered by CFTC of supplying defective fertilizers

* Fined K50 million for excluding liability for defective goods and supplying goods that fail to meet consumer safety standards

* And the exclusion of liability for the resultant damage to crops for farmers, who filed complaints to CFTC for scrutiny

* As CFTC also delivers penalties to CTS Courier, Modern Dry Cleaners and Urban Realtors following investigations on unfair trading practices

By Duncan Mlanjira

Following complaints from farmers alleging the supply of defective fertilizers and the exclusion of liability for the resultant damage to their crops, Competition & Fair Trading Commission (CFTC) has fined agricultural input supplier, Nitro Phos Ltd K50 million for unfair trading practices.

This was announced by the CFTC today, June 8, 2026 in a statement delivered by Chief Executive Officer, Desmond Kaunda, who disclosed that the Commission has ordered six companies to pay administrative monetary fines totaling K361 million for different violations as provided under the Competition and Fair Trading Act (CFTA).

The offenders included Standard-Bank-k100m-penalty-and-FDH-Bank-who-have-been-slapped-with-K100-million-and-K200-million-respectively-for-engaging-in-misleading-conduct-unconscionable-conduct, as well as CTS Courier, Modern Dry Cleaners and Urban Realtors.

The CEO indicated that the Commission launched investigations against Nitro Phos Ltd following two complaints from farmers, who reported a total crop failure on their fields shortly after applying CAN fertilizer purchased through the agro-dealer.

“Both alleged that the fertilizer caused wilting and severe damage, and that subsequent engagements with the company failed to provide effective redress,” said Kaunda, adding that the agro-dealer “denied any direct dealings with the complainants and disputed liability, stating that it does not supply fertilizer in the quantities or packaging described”.

Furthermore, Nitro Phos Ltd was reported to have maintained that its products comply with Malawi Bureau of Standards (MBS) requirements — but “the MBS confirmed that, while Nitro Phos had previously obtained conformity certificates, certain fertilizer batches failed to meet specification standards, particularly regarding nutrient composition and moisture content”.

“The MBS also noted inconsistencies regarding import approvals and compliance for specific consignments. Market surveillance established that Nitro Phos fertilizer was widely distributed through agro-dealers, and multiple farmers across different districts reported similar crop damage following its application.

“Further submissions from distributors and additional complainants corroborated that defective batches were supplied to the market and that the crop damage was consistent with the application of the defective fertilizers.”

Thus the CFTC found that Nitro Phos Ltd’s conduct “amounted to excluding liability for defective goods and the supply of goods that did not meet consumer safety standards … contravening Sections 51(b) and 51(e) of the CFTA”.

Thus on top of the monetary penalty of MK50 million, Nitro Phos has been ordered to take appropriate remedial measures to address the harm caused by the defective fertilizer, including a refund of the purchase price and compensation for the potential losses incurred.

On CTS Courier Services, Kaunda reported that in March 2025 and September 2025, the CFTC opened separate investigations for allegedly excluding liability for defective services and engaging in unconscionable conduct.

“The investigations followed complaints from two consumers: one who had sent two mobile phones worth K360,000 each, and another who sent household items valued at K95,000 through the courier service, which got lost while in transit.

But CTS Courier Services were reported to have not provided any redress when the complainants engaged the company and when from CFTC’s investigations, it was noted that the courier service provider “failed to take any meaningful steps to compensate the affected consumers”, — contravening Sections 51(b) and 51(g) of the CFTA.

CTS Courier has thus been ordered to refund the complainants the full market value of the lost or damaged items as well as the original courier service charges; and to pay a monetary penalty of K5 million for excluding liability for defective services and engaging in unconscionable conduct.

In December 2025, the CFTC launched investigations against Modern Dry Cleaners for alleged unconscionable conduct and excluding liability regarding dry

cleaning services for clothes valued at K1.459 million, which were damaged following poor dry cleaning services.

The dry cleaning services providers were reported to have offered a compensation of K180,000 but it was only 10 times the cost of cleaning services at K18,000, “which the complainant rejected as inadequate given the total value of the clothes”.

Investigations further found that Modern Dry Cleaners’ invoices contained clauses excluding it from any liability for damage cases to the clothes, but also limiting the compensation to only 10 times the cleaning fee, while also permitting the disposal of uncollected items without prior notice.

CFTC concluded that the respondent’s conduct was unfair and unconscionable, thus contravening Sections 51(b) and 51(g) of the CFTA — and was ordered torefund the complainant K1,459,166, representing the full cost of the damaged products.

Modern Dry Cleaners was also ordered to refund the complainant K18,000, representing the cost of the dry cleaning services which proved to be defective and to pay penalty of K3 million for excluding liability for defective services and engaging in unconscionable conduct.

Urban Realtors has been ordered pay a monetary penalty of K3 million for engaging in misleading conduct; unconscionable conduct and failure to disclose material information — and to refund the complainant K3.8 million which was offered by the respondent and duly accepted by the complainant.

The complainant alleged that on November 10, 2023, he purchased two plots (LA03/12 and LA03/13) at Airwing in Lilongwe for K2 million  and signed a sale agreement — but the estate agent failed to allocate the plots, citing ongoing beacon installation and administrative processes, with no clear completion timeline.

Urban Realtors is further reported to have maintained that “the delay was due to administrative processes and denied any wrongdoing, while expressing willingness to resolve the matter, including possible refund”.

“The complainant submitted that with passage of time, the prices of the plots in that area had increased to around K4 million. In this regard, the exact amount refund would not enable him to purchase equivalent value plots.

“The Commission found that the respondent failed to disclose material information, including timelines, risks, and refund terms — thereby depriving the Complainant of informed decision-making.

“This constituted failure to disclose material information under section 51(d) and misleading conduct under section 51(p) of the CFTA. The Commission further found that the prolonged delay and lack of effective remedy caused economic harm to the complainant and amounted to unconscionable conduct under section 51(g) of the CFTA.

In pursuit of a fair and equitable resolution, the the CFTC CEO report that Urban Realtors proposed a structured refund settlement to the complainant of K3.8 million — to be disbursed as K2 million on May 29 2026; K1 million in June 2026; and the remaining balance of K800,000 in July 2026, which the complainant accepted.