Self Evaluation in Business law - Essay Example

Self Evaluation in Business law This paper answers all question exhaustively in an organized manner. Knowledge gained in class has been used as well as works of extensive research. The language used in this assignment report is clear and coherent. The maximum number of word count has been observed and other instruction followed. The paper can successfully provide information to a person who has not studied Business law. It can also help one seeking remedies for different problem under the Sale of good and supply of service act. The part on the consumer Credit act is also well tackled. One can get the principle concepts in the consumer credit from a quick glance at this assignment report. The paper has also tackled some basic guidelines under the unfair trading practices provision. The paper is done using the Harvard referencing system and proper in-text citation and bibliography is provided. There is also a list of appendices used in the research report. Familiar cases and ruling have been applied appropriately, for example the case of in liability for allergic reaction of goods purchased under the sale of goods agreement. Most importantly has been submitted in good time. Last but not least the answer provide in different question have demonstrated that reasonable reach has been conducted and there is understanding of the Sale of good Act of 1974 and the Consumer Credit Act. It is one thing knowing about the Acts, and it is another thing being able to apply the provisions in handling complex real situations. Scenario one Under the Sale of Goods Act, Julia has a right to complain to the seller of the washing machine. It is the buyers duty to inspect goods once there are delivered and to notify the seller of any faults within reasonable time. Some products have warranty periods but the Sale of goods act stipulates that the rights of a buyer can not be curtailed by simple warranty terms and conditions (National Consumer agency 2011). A buyer has the right to inspect goods within reasonable time and place before accepting them. Generally, a buyer who finds goods purchase too be faulty is entitled with the responsibility to proof that the goods were faulty at the time of purchase (DTI 2005). This way, a buyer can request for a full refund. Had Julia inspected the washing machine before six months, it would have been agreed that the machine was fault at the time of sale. However, Julia has reasonable circumstances as to why she did not return the machine earlier. She was traveling and thus had no time to inspect the machine. Julia was not in position to inspect and check the washing machine when it was delivered because she was called immediately the machine was delivered to an emergency and was away for 6 months. Her responsibility in this case is to just proof that the machine was not in satisfactory condition at the time of purchase because she has never used it even once. It is her right as a consumer to get goods of acceptable standard and that are fit for their purpose (National Consumer agency 2011). It is now Julia’s responsibility to act promptly. She can seek refund, replacement or repair under the sale of goods Act. Oliver bought a luxury deep filled duck –down pillow so he would sleep well. However, he did not ask the sellers for man –made fibre pillow. The sellers were unaware of his allergy reactions to feather. Therefore, the sellers acted in good faith while selling Oliver the luxury pillow; he wanted to sleep well and he never told them about any problems with feather. The seller’s responsibility under consumer Act was to let the buyers know that the pillow had feather in it. The case would have been different if Oliver had told the seller that he was allergic to feather. Then, he would have statutory rights to be compensated for the harm suffered and may get another feather free luxury pillow. The product was not faulty or defective, it is just that he was allergic and other buyers may be not allergic. In the case of Adelman-Tremblay V.Jewel Companies, Inc in 1988, it was stated that “evidence of an allergic reaction by itself does not establish a product is defective for purposes of strict liability” .California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District also handled the case of Hennigan V. White, where the plaintiff had got cosmetic injection in her eyelids and suffered a reaction afterwards. The defendant was set free because he had “done nothing wrong”; and he had no way of knowing that the plaintiff would have an allergic reaction to the injection (Vartabedian, 2011). Under the product liability clause, Oliver can not hold the sellers of the pillow responsible for his allergic reactions. Melanie Purchased a lawnmower for her husband from a shop, but it was a second hand shop. She has her rights under the Act of Sale of Goods and Supply of Services of 1990. However, while purchasing a second hand product, one pays fewer amounts in comparison to the full cost of the new item. The reduction in price reflects reasonable reduction in quality. One can not reasonably expect an old lawn mower to perform as a new one. While purchasing in local arrangement from private individuals, the principle of Caveat Emptor “buyers beware” applies. However, Melanie purchased form a secondhand shop and it is reasonable for her to expect reasonable performance of the mower. The performance of the mower should at least conform to its express performance description by the seller. Melanie and Austin the husband, have the responsibility to prove that the mower did not catch fire as result of misuse or faults that should have been obvious at the point of purchasing (DTI 2005). The mower had been described as nearly new and thus Melanie expected it to perform as any one year old mower would reasonably perform. In addition, no faults were pointed out to Melanie at the point of sale. She can thus seek partial refund, replacement or repair. Had it been a new product, Melanie had a full right to claim for the consequential losses and damages. The mower burnt shortly after the purchase and therefore, Melanie can hold that the seller knew of an exsting fault. Ramona has rights under the Sale of Goods and Supply of services Act to get exactly what she ordered for. She wanted both her kitchen and bathroom fitted with real wood. The firm promised to do it using maple but instead used oak. The kitchen floor is different from the bathroom floor. The floor is a shade darker than the sample, and the bathroom floor is already buckled and smelling. She had been given an estimate of 400 pounds but the total bill comes to 700. The decision to get the floor installed could have been largely induced by the price estimates yet the final price was more (Chalmers 2009). The firm is legally liable to Ramona because of misrepresenting information in the leaflet. In the provisions under the Sale of Goods and Supply of services Act, there is an implied condition of fitness and quality. Ramona had impliedly let the firm know that she did not expect the floor to buckle and smell after two week (Elliot & Quinn 2011). Ramona finds the floor starting to smell only after two which under justifiable reliance is less than she expected. She is wronged and can seek specific performance under the law of torts. The floors installed fail to conform to the agreed standard, she thus can ask for redress as long as the non conformity has resulted from nothing like materials or designs she was expected to provide. She is also protected under the 2008 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations. The firm acted unfair because it lacked professional diligence. Scenario two Question 1 Umaira represents the company to the Husseins thus she is an agent. Umaira is an adverting /Sales agent. She represents the company to third parties. She has been authorized to act on behalf on the company and that is why she approached Umaira with the offer (KleinBerger Daniel 2008). Umaira, as Agent has the right to basic remuneration, the right to get her commissions, right to get compensated for any losses, expense or damage incurred while in line of her duties, and the right of holding goods in lien for any unpaid amounts (Stone 2011). She also has some duties as an agent of the company which includes the duty to follow the principal instructions, the duty to exercise care and skill , the duty to personal performance unless authorized by the principal to delegate some duties or other provisions like when is known that she will delegate ,or can not handle a task all by her self, the duty to maintain clear record of accounts and to provide the company with them, the duty to conduct businesses for the company, the duty to act in good faith and honesty, the duty to not to make any undeclared or secret profits, among other duties (Gregory 2001). Question 2 This case represents a regulated agreement which is controlled by consumer Credit Act. Every thing under this agreement has to be in accordance with the Act. Failure to comply with any requirement under the Act may render the agreement unenforceable before the court of law. This is done to protect the public against unfair trading practices (Office of Fair Trade 2011). Question 3 3a.Running –account credit refers to the borrow agreements between a borrower and a lender. Under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act, it is a facility where by the creditor is expected to give the debtor some amounts of money, goods or services in periodical times but the credit limit is never exceeded (Office of Fair Trading 2008). Fixed sum credit refers to the any arrangement where the debtor is entitled to receive some credit in either one amount or in periodical installments. Restricted- use credit refer to agreements whereby a third party agrees to finance a transaction between a debtor and a creditor. It may also involve re –financing an existing debt for the debtor to a supplier or any other third party. In unrestricted –use credit agreements, the debtor is free to use the credit extended to him by the lender in anything. The lender has no interest in how the borrower uses the borrowed finances; he is free to use it in any manner. A debtor-creditor –supplier arrangement, the creditor makes an agreement under prior arrangements, or contemplation of some future arrangements with the supplier to finance a transaction between a debtor and a creditor. In a debtor-creditor arrangement, the agreement is not based on pre-existing arrangements or in the contemplation of a future arrangement. Between the creditor and supplier, and does not refinance existing indebtedness of the debtor. 3b.This case of Umaira and the Husseins falls under the restricted –use credit agreements. The Hussein family takes a credit facility to have their roofing work. There are not free to use the credit in which way they want, in fact the roofing work is done by a third party and the lender finances the transaction (Office of Fair Trade 2011). Question 4 A default notice basically refer to a written notice issued to a person who fails to pay as per agreed in a credit arrangement. Before legal actions are taken against a borrower due to default of payment, the default notice must be issued in advance. Legal action is then taken if the borrower does not respond to the notice. The notice clearly specifies what the borrower has failed to do in regard to the credit agreement. It also has to set out clearly what is expected of the borrower to stop further legal actions. The lender has to wait for 30 days after issuing a debtor with a default notice before taking appropriate legal actions (Office of Fair Trade 2011). . Question 5 The finance company in the case of Hussein’s is not involved in the roofing works. They only came in as creditors to the Hussein to finance a transaction between a debtor and a supplier. Hussein being the borrower can give notice to the financial company of early settlement as soon as he gets the money. However, the Roofing Company did a shoddy work and the Hussein family has a right under the sale of Good and supply of service act to get what they had expected, that is, performance of the service or product as the seller had promised. Though the financing company did not guarantee the quality of the service or delivery by the roofing company, Hussein should hold it responsible. Umaira was an agent representing the roofing company while the company acted as broker to get a financing company to help the Husseins family. It is in order for the finance company to cooperate if the roofing company can not offer replacement or refund (Citizens advice 2011). The Hussein’s family should complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service, if the finance company turns down the claim (Clark 2003). Question 6 The contract under unfair term of trading could be cancelled because the roofing company failed to act with professional diligence. The financing company is also acting without professional diligence by asking for more payment than it was agreed, Umaira had promised the Hussein’s family a credit family with no interests and thus the Hussein’s family would be reasonable in expecting not to pay more (Which works for you 2011). The service rendered was unsatisfactory and the roofing company should be held liable, the Husseins can pay the financing company and seek redress from the roofing Company (Bryan 2011). The agreement can be cancelled under the provision for complaining for goods bought on credit under credit agreements (Direct Gov 2011). References Bryan David, 2011, Straightforward Guide to the Rights of the Consumer, United Kingdom: Straightforward Publishing Chalmers Stewart Mackenzie, 2009, The Sale of Goods Act, 1893, Including the Factors Acts, 1889 & 1890: [1899, USA: Cornell University Library Clark Angela, 2003, Your Consumer Rights: Effective Complaining (Pocket Lawyer) 2nd Revised edition, New York: Routledge-Cavendish Citizen’s advice, 2011, Your rights when you borrow money Available from: http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_money/money_management_index_ew/borrowing_money_index_ews/your_rights_when_you_borrow_money.htm Direct Gov, 2011, Complaining about goods bought on credit Available from: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Consumerrights/Howtocomplainaboutgoodsandservices/DG_196229 DTI, 2005, The Law relating to Supply of Goods and Services, Available from: http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file25486.pdf Elliot Catherine & Quinn France, 2011, Contract Law, 8th Edition, United Kingdom: Longman Gregory William, 2001, The Law of Agency and Partnership, 3rd edition, New York: West Publishing Company KleinBerger Daniel, 2008, Agency, Partnerships, and LLC's (Examples & Explanations) (Examples & Explanations) United Kingdom: Aspen Publishers, Inc National Consumer agency, 2011, Faulty goods Available from: http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Hot_Topics/FAQs/Faulty-goods/ Office of Fair Trading, 2008, Consumer credit - regulated and exempt agreements Available from: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft140.pdf Office of Fair Trade, 2011, Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2010 Available from: http://www.oft.gov.uk/about-the-oft/legal-powers/legal/cca/agreements/ Stone Richard, 2011, The Modern Law of Contract 9th edition, New York: Routledge Vartabedian Steven, 2011, Allergic reaction to product does not establish triable issue of liability Available from: http://www.californiaappellatelawyerblog.com/2011/10/allergic-reaction-to-product-d.html Which works for you, 2011, Returning goods: your legal rights your rights Available from: http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-/returning-goods-your-legal-rights/your-rights/ Appendices Appendices 1 Sale of Goods Act 19791979 CHAPTER 54 An Act to consolidate the law relating to the sale of goods.[6th December 1979]Annotations: Help about Annotation Commencement InformationI1Act wholly in force at 1.1.1980, see s. 64(2)Part I Contracts to Which Act Applies1 Contracts to which Act applies.(1)This Act applies to contracts of sale of goods made on or after (but not to those made before) 1 January 1894.(2)In relation to contracts made on certain dates, this Act applies subject to the modification of certain of its sections as mentioned in Schedule 1 below.(3)Any such modification is indicated in the section concerned by a reference to Schedule 1 below.(4)Accordingly, where a section does not contain such a reference, this Act applies in relation to the contract concerned without such modification of the section. Part II Formation of the Contract Contract of sale2 Contract of sale.(1)A contract of sale of goods is a contract by which the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money consideration, called the price.(2)There may be a contract of sale between one part owner and another.(3)A contract of sale may be absolute or conditional.(4)Where under a contract of sale the property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer the contract is called a sale.(5)Where under a contract of sale the transfer of the property in the goods is to take place at a future time or subject to some condition later to be fulfilled the contract is called an agreement to sell.(6)An agreement to sell becomes a sale when the time elapses or the conditions are fulfilled subject to which the property in the goods is to be transferred. Appendices 2 Consumer Credit Act The Consumer Credit Act 1974 requires most businesses that lend money to consumers or offer goods or services on credit or engage in certain ancillary credit activities to be licensed by the OFT. Trading without a license in such cases is a criminal offence and can result in a fine and/or imprisonment. The Act also regulates the way in which consumer credit licensees carry on business. For example, there are rules on advertising, pre-contract disclosure, credit agreements and post-contractual information. In addition, the Act confers certain rights on consumers, including in relation to withdrawal from a credit agreement, early settlement, and section 75 (joint and several liability). Early settlement Exempt agreements Read More