The time to spot any major faults

Published by admin on

The advertisement on the wall was not clear enough for Mr Martin to see, the advertisement should have been somewhere more noticeable for the customer to see.

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations law states that consumer cannot be misled and for example “left out of important information” (Gov.Uk, 2018)


The contract made by ABC Garages Ltd have unfair terms, which state that “consumer notices must be transparent,” Mr Martin can claim that Abc Garages Ltd had a this, as their term was not clear for Mr Martin to notice. (, 2018) The legal right that Mr Martin can claim it was that the contract had an unfair term basically that it could be revoked from Abc Garages trying to exclude any liability that they had in this case. And it also could be argued that Abc Garages Ltd was not transparent with their terms in case of something had happened in there that caused a damage to Mr Martin’s good.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

The mistake that Mr Martin committed it was that he did not take the car to the garage as he noticed that the was a problem with it.


The warranty was for approximately ten weeks, which converts to about 2 months and about 2 weeks, he left the problems of his car to be inspected by the garage at almost nearly 3 months which is somewhere over the time of the warranty.


Customers may be offered a warranty by any car dealer; some used cars may be sold with a three-month warranty and some may even have a year. Which it comes to the conclusion that Mr Martin was not offered long enough time to spot any major faults with his car. (Law Gistics, 2018)


Mr Martin can approach Abc Garages Ltd and demand repair since the vehicle is, not of satisfactory quality.
“If a customer presents the dealer with a fault, after 30 days, which makes the vehicle, not of satisfactory quality, and not fit for a purpose or not as described, Mr Martin can claim a statutory repair under the Act.” (Law Gistics, 2018)


There is a section in the consumer that informs that “Where a term of a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, purports to exclude or restrict a trader’s liability for negligence, a person is not to be taken to have voluntarily accepted any risk merely because the person agreed to or knew about the term or notice”. (, 2018) Even if Mr Martin had an agreement to the term of the contract it is unfair because ABC Garages were negligent for what occurred to their customers’ vehicle. This term enforces the reason why Abc Garages cannot exclude liability because they are to blame for the occurred fire.


“So, terms that exclude liability ‘as far as the law permits’ are no more likely to be fair than those which contain no such wording”. (Gov.Uk, 2018) This means even though Abc Garages claim to have a notice excluding liability it does not that they enforce it.


Mr Martin was misled in to the agreement of the contract, it was originally, stated that the condition of the car was immaculate and that it had only done 50,000 miles and had only 2 previous owners, if he knew of the actual conditions, there would not be an agreement on his part to the contract. If the car had broken down in three weeks perhaps it would give Mr Martin enough time to take the car to be repaired as it would be still under the warranty period for it to be resolved.


Abc Garages Ltd gave Mr Martin misleading omissions of the contract in order from them to benefit and make a profit from the sale if they told him the about the real condition of the car possibly their customer would not have agreed to make the contract with them.


Section 13 of consumer rights indicates that sales that the goods implied by the seller must match the description which it was not the case for Abc Garages Ltd. (, 2018) Mr Martin is entitled to deny and reject the product, as for the breach of the conditions of the vehicle are fraudulent and he been scammed.  (Keenan and Riches 2011 p.320. p319) To some extent what made Mr Martin purchase the car, was the influence of the good description that he previously that been stated.


Mr Martin should approach Abc Garages and explain that is a void contract since they have violated the terms, he must demand his money the money that he paid for his car to be returned back to him. (Keenan and Riches 2011, p.213) A contract is a void contract since it is illegal to lie or hide about the original conditions of a consumer’s goods for him to make a contract. And also, the contract can be simply void because it breaches principles such as fairness. (Business Dictionary, 2018).


One of the terms of the consumer rights act in section 14 it clarifies that the product that is supposed to be sold by the seller must of satisfactory quality which it was not the case for Mr Martin, he been deceived about the real condition of the car that he bought. Therefore, this is deemed as unsatisfactory quality as it is not fit proper use by the consumer. “Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.” (, 2018)


Mr Martin is able to take legal action since Abc Garages Ltd have broken one of the most essentials terms of the Consumers Rights Act 2015. His car was in an unsatisfactory condition and did not fulfil his needs as it broke down a few weeks after he bought it.


The mistake made by him was waiting too long to take his E Type Jaguar to Abc Garages when his engine first overheated he could have given the garage a call whilst the ten warranty was still valid.


Mr Martin has bought the car in good faith he was misled by what the seller has advertised, which gave him the boost to make the purchase. Mr Martin is an innocent purchaser he only went along with what he thought could have been the real value of the vehicle.


In order to be an innocent purchaser, the buyer must have good faith and he paid a high amount for the E type Jaguar which he thought it was worth it. Mr Martin actually thought that the car is worth more money than what he paid for it. By Mr Martin paying the actual price that the car is offered it showed that he had good faith and when he bought the car.


Mr Martin had no knowledge of where the vehicle background he just went along with the information that was provided by Abc Garages Ltd (Law Gistics, 2018).


In case if the car was stolen under the terms of the sales of goods act, Mr Martin would be able to use the goods as his in case the original owner of the goods was barred to give the seller permission to sell. (, 2018)


Also, Mr Martin would not be able to claim the title of the car as his unless the original owner has given consent for the seller of the goods to be sold. (, 2018)


A contract usually is a legally binding agreement, when an offer has been accepted is considered an agreement between parties. For example, Mr Martin agreed to buy the car with the seller when he gave £30 thousand cash to the car dealer.


In order for a contract to proceed with, there must be following conditions, which are a valid offer, the acceptance of the offer, a consideration which could be provided by both parties and the intention to create legal relations by also, both parties. (Levi Solicitors, 2018)

It is very important for parties that wish to form a binding legal contract they must make set out the terms clearly, therefore, there cannot refuse agreements with the intention of the parties.


Section 21 estoppel If the true owner allows the innocent buyer to believe that the seller has right to sell the goods, ownership of the goods will pass to the buyer, which in this case is Mr Martin only gets to keep the car if there was permission from the original seller. (Keenan and Riches 2011 p328)


The buyer Mr Martin was unaware of any lack of authority on part of the factor. (Keenan and Riches 2011 p329).


One of the Legal rights of Mr Martin is to ask to be provided with a refund from the dealer since, as he would be stopped by the police he would have received a crime reference number and property log number, these must be shown along with proof of purchase of the vehicle. (Citizen Advice, 2018)


Just because Mr Martin committed himself to an agreement to purchase the car it does not mean that this agreement will be enforced by the court. ( 2018)

This agreement cannot be legally bound because there is a breach of wishes that were desired by Mr Martin such as having a fully functioning car and he been a victim of a fraud.


References: (2018). What is void contract? definition and meaning. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). If you think you’ve bought stolen goods. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Intention to create legal relations. online Available at: Accessed 3 Jan. 2018.

Gould, J. (2018). Formation of contract: Intention to create legal relations – Levi Solicitors LLP. online Levi Solicitors LLP. Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Marketing and advertising: the law: Regulations that affect advertising –

GOV.UK. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Unfair contract terms guidance.  online Available at:  Accessed 3 Jan. 2018 (2018). Legal Solutions for the Motor Trade – Business Law Advice – UK Automotive Retail Industry. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Motor Trade Warranty Advice and Recommendations-Used Car Warranties, Dealer Guarantees and Service Contracts. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Consumer Rights Act 2015. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Sale of Goods Act 1979. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018. (2018). Sale of Goods Act 1979. online Available at: Accessed 2 Jan. 2018.


Riches, S. (2011). Keenan and Riches’ Business Law 10th edn. Harlow, England: Pearson Education UK.

Categories: Industry


I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out