Is the legislative framework outdated or misunderstood?

legal updates

A claimant mixed pre-2015 laws with a post-2015 car purchase and the result was, frankly, embarrassing.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

A claimant mixed pre-2015 laws with a post-2015 car purchase and the result was, frankly, embarrassing. Here’s a quick refresher on which Acts actually apply and why it matters in motor trade disputes.

Recently a member received a claim form which had pleaded that the claimant was a consumer for the purposes of the purchase of a used vehicle from a trader. However, within the same claim, reference was made to the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

The contract had commenced after 1 October 2015. The contract was specific between a trader and a consumer for the purposes of the purchase of the car by the consumer.

Upon reading the claim form, which aside from being extremely long-winded and considerably beyond the realms of a concise statement in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules, the law had been misapplied. Whether this was the result of some artificial intelligence hiding away since the 1980s, or whether “computer says no” applied on this occasion, the claim was, for want of a better word, embarrassing.

It reminded me of a well-respected judge who used to point out to litigants that if they were unsure of their claim or how to prepare for it, seek legal advice, because, after all, the judge was not a mechanic; he had chubby fingers and would not know the exhaust from the air filter. The analogy sprang to mind in this particular claim.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 came into effect on 1 October 2015, and we have now passed its 10-year birthday. Like it or loathe it, the legislation replaced the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 for contracts between traders and consumers. It does still apply to contracts pre-1 October 2015, but who has a contract that long anyway?

The same goes for the Sale of Goods Act 1979, which still applies to contracts pre-1 October 2015; however, for contracts after 1 October 2015 the primary legislation is the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 was introduced in the UK to modernise, simplify and consolidate consumer protection law which had become outdated, fragmented and difficult to navigate.

It consolidated the Sale of Goods Act 1979, Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002. The legislation was deemed often confusing to consumers, and by the look of the consumer’s pleaded case, still appears to be as confusing today as it was before the statutory change.

The law has certainly clarified certain circumstances but whether it remains fit for purpose (sorry, just had to say that) is a talking point. What would be welcome is an amendment to the Act specific to car dealers; however, there are no plans from the current government to make changes any time soon.

MotorDeskA car dealership management platform that combines all the tools your business needs into a single, unified and modern platform.

Available on all your devices via your web browser or the dedicated MotorDesk desktop and mobile apps.

If you have had the same issue or a similar problem, why not call our legal team at Lawgistics for guidance on the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and motor trade disputes.

Adrian BrazierLitigation ExecutiveRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Experts vs. “Garage Reports”: The evidence edge that could win your case

Garage reports can help, but only CPR Part 35 expert evidence tends to swing a dispute. Before costs spiral, here’s how and when to use experts to protect your position with consumers, businesses, and finance companies.

“Running Well”: Two words that cost a consumer £3,300

The judge found our member’s repairs were sound and ruled the email undercut the later allegations, dismissing the claim and awarding expenses.

The photo you didn’t take could cost you thousands

Proving a vehicle’s condition at handover is the difference between recovering costs and footing the bill.

They Broke It, You Don’t Pay: Intervening Acts that defend dealer claims

When damage stems from what a customer did after purchase, you may not be on the hook.

Come On, Baby, Light My Fire

If a car goes up in smoke, does the buyer’s insurance mean the trader escapes liability? Here’s how insurer involvement really works…

Don’t Get Soaked: The Habitation Checks That Stop Motorhome Rejections

Buyers are rejecting motorhomes for damp, leaks and unsafe cabins. Here’s what to inspect in the habitation area and why a simple pre-sale check can save you a costly Consumer Rights Act dispute.

Can You Claim What You Haven’t Lost? The ‘No Loss’ Principle Meets s19 CRA 2015

A live claim against a member raises a sharp question: if no money has changed hands and only deductions are in dispute, has the claimant suffered a recoverable loss?

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.