69 As to the balance of the injunctive relief, the question is whether it is necessary in the circumstances. Those circumstances include the several matters relied on by the first defendant together with the relief that I will order. Of particular relevance to some of the injunctions are the changes to business practices and procedures concerning the taking of deposits, not requiring a payment unless the customer is happy with the product and not requiring the original receipt for refund purposes. I do not mean that as an all inclusive list of changes introduced to avoid the problems experienced by the 17 complainants but as referring to areas at the heart of the complaints. It may be considered that the first defendant having taken the steps that it has, time and events should be left to run their course and injunctive relief be refused, at least for the present. Against that however is the consideration that injunctive relief may be considered to add a significant deterrent effect to the relief granted when regard is had to the possible consequence of non-compliance. And there I think is the rub, for considering the contravening conduct of the defendants, their pre-litigation conduct and continuing refusal to come to terms, and their conduct of the litigation which forced the plaintiff to establish his case at every point, there is real cause for concern as to the observance of the statutory norms of conduct when the dust of this case has settled down. I propose to grant some but not all of the injunctions sought. I exclude injunctions which in my view are unnecessary or not appropriate for discretionary reasons, including the potential for difficulty in enforcement. Otherwise, and for reasons mentioned above, I will not restrain the second defendant.