Jump to content

Legal Eagle

Approved Member
  • Content Count

    755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Legal Eagle

  • Rank
    Over 500 posts

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    South East England
  • Interests
    Caravanning. Having fun. The law - hard work but pays well m'lud.
  • Towcar
    Of course
  • Caravan
    Naturally!

Recent Profile Visitors

1,114 profile views
  1. I've known people with a large mortgage to name their property Millstone. I've also seen a house called Llareggub.
  2. The Swift already has an onboard Flojet pump, not a submersible ultraflow.
  3. It's at times like this I wish I'd listened closer at school when something was being said about a bloke called Faraday and his cage! ⛈⚡
  4. Don't insult my intelligence. I really don't understand what you are trying to achieve with this. With an air of authority you state what automatically applies in law then you seem to agree that B2B contracts can include clauses affecting returns/refunds but then try scoring points by telling me, incorrectly, what I presume. Even the links you provide make the position clear. "Transactions between businesses are covered by the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA). In general, businesses are assumed to be free to enter into whatever contracts they agree between themselves. Therefore, you should make sure you're happy with the contracts you agree with other businesses." "You don't have the same protection as individual consumers when you make purchases exclusively for the use of your business. A term in a consumer contract excluding liability for defective goods would be automatically invalid. But when buying as a business it's up to you to check in advance what terms and conditions you're agreeing to." I do not intend continuing to repeat myself any further.
  5. Read it carefully then combine it with all of your professional knowledge and expertise in contract law, particularly the relevant stated cases and High Court rulings relevant to business to business contract cases. Then I'm sure you will understand why it quite clearly says most, not all, of SOGA applies to business to business contracts then lists some of what doesn't apply and the view a court is likely to take. I don't know how up to date the link is but most of SOGA & SOGASA were in fact repealed by CRA 2015 and very little is left in force. The link also says: "However, bear in mind that liability may be limited or excluded by the terms and conditions of a business-to-business contract." Put simply that means the agreed contract could legitimately limit or exclude the ability to return or reject the goods and/or claim refunds for faulty goods or services. "You can claim reasonable business losses if this has not been disclaimed against by the supplier." In other words, contract clauses can legitimately remove the ability to claim business losses as a result of faulty goods or services. Of course none of this would prevent bringing a case under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 if applicable. To answer your last point, I have not at any point claimed or stated that dealers have no rights within business to business purchasing. I am trying to point out that a completely different approach is taken in law compared to consumers. So much so that a business to business contract could very legitimately prevent or restrict returns and refunds simply because SOGA referred to contracts and the obligations entered into. I have no idea what business to business contracts exist in the caravan industry and suspect they would be considered commercially sensitive and not available for general knowledge. Finally, it is your, and everyone else's, prerogative to choose who or what they wish to believe so I see little point in continuing and going around in circles.
  6. No we're not. To quote from the link - The law treats business-to-business contracts and business-to-consumer contracts differently. These differences include the following: - it then gives overviews of relevant legislation and contractual points. It also points out that business rights are more restricted than consumer rights.
  7. In response to the post saying businesses are not consumers under CRA, your reply stated, "Yes they definitely are and as explained to me by trading standards a few year back with a claim I was making to reject a caravan, which was successful." So there may now be some confusion and debate at crossed purposes. To clarify, the CRA 2015 does not apply to businesses. Businesses tend to rely on contract law actions - it generally reaps compensation on top of refunds. The Sale of Goods Act 1979 gave consumer and, to a lesser extent, some business protection which businesses can still use. The CRA repealed all consumer references in SOGA.
  8. Even the NI website in the link is referring businesses to contract law and not consumer law. It is actually giving advice on terms that can and can't be excluded within a business supply of goods or services contract.
  9. Of course I'm not doubting your honesty. If that's what a British trading standards officer stated then they were incorrect. The CRA 2015 is very clear and specific. It doesn't apply to businesses. Any protections they may claim would come under the contractual arrangements with their supplier, not the CRA. Read Section 2 and the Explanatory Notes. Your link is to a Northern Ireland business advice website on NI business matters so does not apply here but even that refers to certain types of businesses being excluded. Businesses are protected by contract law not consumer law.
  10. I'm sorry if you have that perception of the response but you must look at it in the light of other incorrect assertions on this thread. I'm sure you can understand the importance of accuracy in the interpretation and application of legal issues and how dangerous being given the wrong information/advice could be and no true professional should ignore it.
  11. This is why it is of paramount importance to understand and correctly interpret legislation rather than read what you think might or should be there then make incorrect assumptions instead of what is actually written. Section 2 of The CRA 2015 gives a clear definition of a consumer who must be a real person not acting in the course of a trade, business, craft or profession and, in the explanatory notes, it specifically excludes small businesses and incorporated organisations: “Consumer” means an individual acting for purposes that are wholly or mainly outside that individual’s trade, business, craft or profession. That would even exclude a "one man band" dealership as they buy, and sell, wholly in the course of their business.
  12. You persist in your inaccurate, unqualified assertions. Manufacturers normally include a claims condition that you go through an approved dealer or manufacturer approved workshop for warranty work for inspection prior to claim approval. However, certainly with Swift you can go direct to the manufacturer to report a warranty issue and they then notify the dealer or local approved workshop to arrange an inspection. They even have a direct reporting facility called Swift Connect. Section 30 of The CRA 2015 covers guarantees and guarantors (warranties and warranty providers) which includes manufacturer warranties so in the case of a manufacturer warranty it does apply. Nobody has suggested a warranty overrides legislation and most, if not all, clearly state that nothing in the warranty affects statutory rights. As for taking court action against a manufacturer, below is an extract from a local govt. website you linked to as an authority on consumer law earlier this year. As you can see, it confirms a manufacturer warranty is between manufacturer and buyer and they can be taken to court regarding the warranty they provided. The dealer is only mentioned as a point of complaint with the potential for other parts of the CRA regarding quality etc. Q. I bought a new motorbike last year that came with a manufacturer's six-year anti-corrosion and paintwork guarantee. The exhaust has started to rust and the paint on the tank is peeling so the bike will probably need major re-painting and re-chroming work, which will be costly. The manufacturer is refusing to honour the guarantee and, as this was one of my main reasons for buying this brand, I am very annoyed. What should I do? A. Even though you did not pay for it, the guarantee provider takes on a contractual obligation to honour the terms of the guarantee under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. You are entitled to take legal action against the manufacturer. You can also complain to the dealer who you bought the motorbike from as you have rights under the same law if the motorbike is not of satisfactory quality. If you paid for the motorbike on your credit card or on finance arranged by the dealer then you may have rights against the card or finance provider. https://www.hants.gov.uk/business/tradingstandards/consumeradvice/goodsandservices/guarantees
  13. There is only one source to answer your questions........the manufactures that have that condition, and I believe there may be one or two others apart from Swift, or at least there was.
  14. It's a long standing condition on Swift warranties that the caravan is kept/stored in the UK. It isn't intended to affect normal holiday use outside the UK as long as it is primarily kept here.
  15. As shipbroker says, trailers over 7 metre length, not including the A frame, can only be towed by a motor vehicle having a maximum permitted weight exceeding 3500Kg. Your profile shows a Volvo XC90 which, no doubt, doesn't meet the requirement! https://www.gov.uk/towing-with-car/weight-and-width-limits
×
×
  • Create New...