header-logo header-logo

Time to redress the balance

19 May 2011 / David Hertzell
Issue: 7466 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Victims of scams deserve a clear & easy route to redress, says David Hertzell

When a consumer buys faulty goods, they know they can get their money back. By contrast, their position when they have been duped or pressured into making a purchase is much less clear. The remedies consumers can rely on when rogue traders lie about the products they sell, or use aggressive tactics, lie at the heart of our current consultation, launched last month in collaboration with the Scottish Law Commission (Consumer Redress for Misleading and Aggressive Practices).

Key areas of the proposals

  • Misleading practices such as fake “wins”; “free” goods which are not; falsely claiming to be members of a trade association; or selling “miracle products” which falsely claim to cure illness or restore youth.
  • Aggressive sellers using persistent sales calls; salespersons who ignore requests to leave; threats to damage the consumer’s credit rating unless they pay a disputed debt; aggressive wheel-clamping; or “presentations” where intimidating doormen made it difficult for consumers to leave.
  • New remedies. The
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll