I have heard some legal claptrap in my time – and not just when this author is dishing out advice on his telephone day either – but this takes the biscuit!
Our client is sued for the cost of repairs to a car. It is objected to because of a lack of evidence of defect at point of sale, fair wear and tear, etc., and as is often the case, the judge set the bar for our client to prove this to a level that was impossible to meet. However, even Judge Generous had limits. Part of the objection was that £1200 of the repair bill had been paid for by the warranty company. Yet the customer was claiming this £1200 from our client and did not mention at any stage up to the trial that the warranty company had already met that expense.
When presented with this in court, the claimant’s justification was thus – because he had paid additionally for a third party warranty, the warranty payout was under a separate contract to the contract he had with our client for the purchase of the car. And as the warranty payout was under a separate contract, this should not be taken into consideration when assessing the extent of our client’s contractual breach. The customer would not accept that he was asking for money that had already been given to him by another to make good the defect. He was asking to be given the money twice, and thankfully this element of the claim, at least, was dismissed.
Leading experts in print, promotional clothing, staff uniforms, branded merchandise and PPE. Involution is your brand partner for promotional marketing and workwear, a one-stop-shop for your branded marketing needs for any business size and industry.
