Consumer remedies for faulty goods
著者
書誌事項
Consumer remedies for faulty goods
(Law Com., no. 317)(Scot Law Com, no. 216)
TSO, c2009
大学図書館所蔵 全2件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Publisher's no. : Cm 7725 ; SG/2009/218
"November 2009"
内容説明・目次
内容説明
Every year millions of consumers return faulty goods to the shop or supplier, but the law is complex. There are two legal regimes: Under traditional UK law, consumers are entitled to reject the goods and receive a full refund ('the right to reject'), provided they act within 'a reasonable time'. This has been supplemented by the European 1999 Consumer Sales Directive, which states that consumers are entitled to a repair or replacement. If the retailer is unable to repair or replace the goods in a reasonable time or without significant inconvenience, the consumer may then ask for a refund ('rescission') or a reduction in price. There has been little attempt to integrate these two regimes. Consumers may use either, leading to confusion and complexity. The European Commission's proposal for a new directive on consumer rights would reform the law in this area and remove the right to reject. The Commissions recommend that the right to reject should be kept as a short-term remedy of first instance. It is a simple remedy which inspirers consumer confidence.
Consumers should normally exercise the right to reject within 30 days, and should be entitled to ask for a refund or price reduction after one failed repair or one failed replacement; or where the goods have proved dangerous. Other recommendations cover: right to reject for minor defects; rescission and the 'deduction for use'; proposed two-year cut-off; and, better integration of the two regimes.
「Nielsen BookData」 より