Podcast: the Ugly
Historically, the concept of ‘deemed acceptance’ in s 11(4) and s 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 operated quite harshly as far as consumer buyers were concerned, but the amendment of s 35 by the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the introduction of new consumer remedies in s 48A of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 has satisfactorily remedied the situation.
Podcast: the Ugly
If a consumer is supplied with unsatisfactory goods he can reject them unless he has accepted them. He can accept them by telling the buyer they are ok or if he alters them in some way or keeps them for a reasonable time.(1) There is no introduction – no context or setting out what the key issue is in clear terms. Candidates often forget an answer is both a legal answer but also a piece of English; a good introduction, development and conclusion are important. This answer is rather staccato, with points made but no in depth analysis.
The courts have for a long time given the consumer very little time to decide whether to reject, sometimes only a few days or at most a couple of weeks or so.(2) Citation of authorities is important; this essay is bereft of any case references or, indeed, statutory reference – even the Sale of Goods Act 1979 does not merit a mention.
The law has been changed (3) When was the law changed and by what Act or precedent? to give the consumer more time and the courts are more generous in allowing more time as was shown in a case involving a yacht where eight months later the consumer was entitled to reject the yacht which had an overweight keel. In one case involving a car the judge held the buyer could not reject where the buyer had had it only three weeks and not even used up the complimentary tank of petrol.
Sometimes the consumer signs a form saying that the goods are ok this can prevent the consumer rejecting the goods but the law has now been changed so a consumer is not bound and has time to examine the goods. (4) Again no reference to when or by what provision?
If the consumer alters the goods then he cannot reject them because they must be in the same condition to return to the buyer. Also if the consumer gives the goods as a present he cannot reject them because they have been given as a gift to a third party.
The EU has introduced new rules which allow the consumer to demand repair or replacement of the goods instead of just rejecting them and getting monetary compensation. (5) Should have been a reference to the EU Consumer Sales and Associated Guarantees Directive 99/44/EC and the implementation by UK in s 48A-F Sale of Goods Act 1979.
In a Scottish case a farmer bought an agricultural implement which did not work well and asked for it to be repaired and it was sent away to the manufacturer who apparently successfully repaired it but when the farmer asked what had been wrong with it and how it had been repaired the seller refused to tell him the farmer was not required to take the implement back and could reject it.
Now the consumer can ask for repair or replacement it makes life easier for them. (6) Answer ends abruptly with no conclusion and no mention of current controversy surrounding the unilateral right of withdrawal in s 35 and potential impact of the draft EU Consumer Rights Directive.
This answer might just scramble a pass but is weak in that it is short and while it contains no fundamental errors it fails to mention relevant legislation It fails to mention any of the key cases and does not attempt to place them in any sort of chronological development and show how the precedents in relation to acceptance have developed. At least, the candidate has stayed on the point and not included irrelevant material, but it is more like a note form answer than a fully structured and thought out essay.