Myassignment.live is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university
To,
Ismail,
Dear Mr. Ismail,
Recently we came across the fact that you building got into a massive fire because of a defective fridge-freezer you bought a few days back from the online retailer XO.COM. The fridge-freezer was delivered to you within 48 hours from the time of purchase and was subsequently installed on the same day. Within five days of the delivery the fridge-freezer was observed by you to be making funny sound and there was a smell of burnt plastic from the back of the fridge-freezer. It has been found in our report that you had complained about this issue to the customer service of the online retailer XO.com. The customer service, according to our information, had assured to you that as the product was new therefore the smell and the noise was normal. You had also been advised by the customer service to keep the fridge away for at least one meter from the wall, however, it was not possible for you since the kitchen in your flat was really small to follow their instructions. It also came to our attention that one week later when you visited your friend in the same building the fridge-freezer caught fire and your building had completely burnt down. We would like to inform you that in the investigation that has been conducted by us it was found that the fridge-freezer that you bought, catching fire, is not an independent incident. There have been almost 250 similar incidents reported for the same model of fridge-freezer to catch fire. As trading standards officers, it is our responsibility to provide you with the detailed information about the product safety standards and regulations that are being followed in the United Kingdom. The product safety standards are followed in the United Kingdom by following the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the General Product Safety Regulations 2005. Under the provisions of General Product Safety Regulations 2005 the manufacturers or the importers are required to be in compliance with the product safety laws. The manufacturers under the provision of this Regulation is required to take proper course of action for remedying any issue arising in any sold product which has risk for safety. This might include modification of the product, issuing new information about the product and to make the customers stop using the product and return it in exchange of refunds. The manufacturers of the products are also liable under this regulation to contact all its customers and to make them aware of the safety issue that has been raised in the product. The manufacturers and sellers are also liable for the products they sell under the Consumer Protection Act 1987. The Consumer Protection Act 1987 can be seen as implementing the directive put forward by the European Union towards the liabilities on defective products. Under the provisions of section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 it is required for the manufacturer or the retailer to be identifying the defect existing in the product. This provision had been discussed in the judgment of Wilkes v Depuy [2016] EWHC 3096 QB. The example of A v National Blood Authority [2001] EWHC QB 446. Following these two judgments, in your case, the legal entitlement you have as a consumer would be objective to the expectations that are reasonable and not by the subjective expectation. Another product safety related issue that can be raised in this context is whether the product sold to you is of unsatisfactory quality. The importance of clarification of the aspect of quality of the product had been discussed in Wren v Holt (1703) 1 KB 610. In the case it was held that a buyer would be liable for product liability if there was reasonable reliance existing upon the judgment of the seller by the buyer. In the judgment of Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31, the point in concern that had been raised was with adequate warning about the original or the potential defect in the good whether the purchaser would have accepted the products. Certain goods can be seen as posing inherent risk, however, as long as the risk has been conveyed to the customer the sale of such goods remain acceptable in its entirety. It had been discussed by the judges in their verdict in Rogers and another v Parish (Scarborough) Ltd and others [1987] 2 All ER 232. It was held in this case that whether the supply of the goods which have inherent risk is considered to be acceptable by any reasonable person in similar situations. The court further held that if there is no knowledge of the consumer then it will still remain a danger. In your case we can conclude that the fridge-freezer was a hazardous product as there had been multiple incidents of the fridge freezer getting burned and injuring the users in the process. This information, as we found in our investigation, was withheld from you. The supply of this product can be seen as possessing inherent risk which cannot be considered to be of acceptable standard. Thus in conclusion to the above discussion we can state to you that your manufacturers have been in breach of their duty to supply goods that are safe to use. In furtherance to this, they also breached their duty when they did not provide you with any prior warning about the fridge catching fire. Therefore, after analysing the entire situation it can be considered to be a breach of product safety liability by the owners and the manufacturers. The rights that you have under the Consumer Act and similar regulations have been discussed in detail by the Citizen Advice Bureau.
We hope in a very sincere manner that the information provided by us to you is useful and you are properly guided about your rights. In case you need any more assistance from us, please feel free to contact us.
Regards,
From,
To,
Ismail,
Dear Mr. Ismail,
Recently we came across the fact that you building got into a massive fire because of a defective fridge-freezer you bought a few days back from the online retailer XO.COM. The fridge-freezer was delivered to you within 48 hours from the time of purchase and was subsequently installed on the same day. Within five days of the delivery the fridge-freezer was observed by you to be making funny sound and there was a smell of burnt plastic from the back of the fridge-freezer. It has been found in our report that you had complained about this issue to the customer service of the online retailer XO.com. The customer service, according to our information, had assured to you that as the product was new therefore the smell and the noise was normal. You had also been advised by the customer service to keep the fridge away for at least one meter from the wall, however, it was not possible for you since the kitchen in your flat was really small to follow their instructions. It also came to our attention that one week later when you visited your friend in the same building the fridge-freezer caught fire and your building had completely burnt down. We would like to inform you that in the investigation that has been conducted by the Trading Standard Office it was found that the fridge-freezer that you bought, catching fire, is not an independent incident. There have been almost 250 similar incidents reported for the same model of fridge-freezer to catch fire. As officers of the Citizen Advice Bureau, it is our responsibility to provide you with the detailed information about the rights and responsibilities you have as a consumer for the product safety liability in the country. As you have already been made aware of the product liability regulations that take place in the country of UK, therefore our primary aim would be to provide you with the knowledge about the rights you have under the provisions of the legislations present. As it has already discussed that the provisions of product safety are regulated by way of various legislations. These legislations, as has been provided to you by the trading standard officers, include the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994. The provisions relating to the rights for claiming damages are provided under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the safety standards measures under the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994. For the analysis of the extent of damage that you can claim under the Sale of Goods Act we would first need to compare the different standards of safety mentioned under the Consumer Protection Act 1987. Referring to section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987, the main question that arises is if the product can be considered to be as safe as a consumer is entitled of expecting it to be. The standard for this process includes considering in a careful manner about the degrees of risk that the product is seen to be possessing and the balance of the interest and expectations that the buyer and seller has relating to the risk. However, it often can be seen that, any safety risk that is not sufficient to be considered defective under the Consumer Protection Act is considered to be of unsatisfactory quality under the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act. As per the Sale of Goods Act the quality of a product is often times considered to be a requirement that is more demanding than the safety of the product. Taking into consideration the previous statement, we can advice you that placing your claims under the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act would be more favourable to you for the safety issues that have been raised in your case's context. It is observed that any economic damage arising because of defect in the product is recoverable under the Sale of Goods Act and not under the Consumer Protection Act. For any kind of property damage caused by a defective product, the fridge-freezer in your case, you might also have the right to claim remedies such as rejection of the product, termination of the contract, repairing or replacing the product and rescission. However, you must keep in mind while you claim for compensation or remedy that the recovery of the contract is restricted under the rules of privity of contract. The rights for rejection and termination of products of the buyers are available under the provisions of section 20 and section 22 of the Consumer Protection Act. Under section 11 (3) of the Sale of Goods Act the buyer is provided with the right of termination of the contract or the rejection of the goods. This section provides you with the discretion of whether you want complete rescission and compensation for the loss you suffered by terminating the contract or you want to exercise your right to claim for repair or replacement by simply rejecting the product. Following the judgment in J & H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd [2007] UKHL 9 it was observed that if there is an implied term which makes the seller bound to the request of the buyer to provide for the exact nature of the defect in the problem and the requirements of the necessary steps to repair it and they do not provide so to the buyer, then the buyer would be entitled for the rejection of the product. As in your case you contacted the customer services of the online retailer XO.com who did not clearly look into the seriousness of the defect in your fridge freezer, and did not provide you with an useful remedy therefore, you have the right to reject the product, or in your case claim for damages for the loss you suffered.
We hope in a very sincere manner that the information provided by us to you is useful and you are properly guided about your rights. In case you need any more assistance from us, please feel free to contact us.
Regards,
To,
Ismail,
Dear Mr. Ismail,
Recently we came across the fact that you building got into a massive fire because of a defective fridge-freezer you bought a few days back from the online retailer XO.COM. The fridge-freezer was delivered to you within 48 hours from the time of purchase and was subsequently installed on the same day. Within five days of the delivery the fridge-freezer was observed by you to be making funny sound and there was a smell of burnt plastic from the back of the fridge-freezer. It has been found in our report that you had complained about this issue to the customer service of the online retailer XO.com. The customer service, according to our information, had assured to you that as the product was new therefore the smell and the noise was normal. You had also been advised by the customer service to keep the fridge away for at least one meter from the wall, however, it was not possible for you since the kitchen in your flat was really small to follow their instructions. It also came to our attention that one week later when you visited your friend in the same building the fridge-freezer caught fire and your building had completely burnt down. We would like to inform you that in the investigation that has been conducted by the Trading Standard Office it was found that the fridge-freezer that you bought, catching fire, is not an independent incident. There have been almost 250 similar incidents reported for the same model of fridge-freezer to catch fire. As the lawyers representing all the residents of the building in a collective manner, it is our responsibility to provide you with the detailed information about the claims you might have collectively against XO.com, coolpoint,and White house. We believe that you have already been provided with the detailed report of the investigation conducted by the Trading Standard Officer where the main reasons for the accident had been mentioned. We must, in addition to this, bring to your notice that coolpoint, the fridge-freezer you bought, is a UK based subsidiary company to the United States based company white house coolpoint, has often been in the news for the past few years for almost 250 similar incidents happening where the fridge freezer caught fire without any reason in the UK only. It has been found in our investigation that the back panel covering the fridge freezer of coolpoint, is made of plastic. Under the health safety regulations existing in the United States the use of plastic for the back panel of fridge freezers are prohibited. However, we must bring to your notice that no such prohibition exists in the UK. The overseas based subsidiary companies are required to follow the general product safety directive established under the European Union. Under this directive a product should meet certain statutory requirements under the provisions of either the European Union laws or the national legislations for being considered as safe. As you bought the product from an online retailer, the retailer is bound for following the online rules provided under the EU directive. The first and foremost rule they have to follow is to place products on the market which are considered to be safe. The online businesses are also required to inform the customers about any risk that is associated with the product they are delivering and also to ensure that the products which are considered unsafe or dangerous in the market are traceable so that the authorities can remove them for the avoidance of the risk of the consumers. As it is seen in your case that XO.com failed to take these necessary steps and supplied to you a faulty fridge freezer which cause almost 100 lives to be lost. The same rules also apply for the subsidiary COOLPOINT. As a owner company having a subsidiary company in UK the white house will also be bound to follow the regulations set under the UK legislations for product safety. In UK the Code of Practice on Consumer Product Related Safety Recalls and Other Corrective Actions are required to be followed to ensure product safety. The framework for good practice and cooperation under this code requires the business to prepare plans and activities for ensuring product safety plans. Any overseas company doing business in UK is required to take necessary actions for safety risks arising in their products. In your case, even after 250 incidents of fire, there had been no action taken by the White house as a parent company. Therefore as a collective action against the three companied you can file a suit in the European Union Commission.
We hope in a very sincere manner that the information provided by us to you is useful and you are properly guided about your rights. In case you need any more assistance from us, please feel free to contact us.
Regards,
A v National Blood Authority [2001] EWHC QB 446
Code of Practice on Consumer Product Related Safety Recalls and Other Corrective Actions
Consumer Protection Act 1987
European Commission, 'Product Safety Rules' (European Commission - European Commission, 2018) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/product-safety-and-requirements/product-safety/product-safety-rules_en> accessed 14 January 2020
General Product Safety Regulations 2005
GOV.UK (2018). Supporting better product recalls. [online] GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/supporting-better-product-recalls [Accessed 14 Jan. 2020].
GOV.UK, "Product safety advice for businesses", 2019. [online] GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/product-safety-advice-for-businesses [Accessed 14 Jan. 2020].
Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31
J & H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd [2007] UKHL 9
Rogers and another v Parish (Scarborough) Ltd and others [1987] 2 All ER 232
Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994
Sale of Goods Act 1979
Wilkes v Depuy [2016] EWHC 3096 QB
Wren v Holt (1703) 1 KB 610
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
My Assignment Help. (2022). Accounting Principles II. Retrieved from https://myassignment.live/free-samples/acct2023-accounting-principles-ii/financial-statements-of-the-business-file-A1D39FE.html.
"Accounting Principles II." My Assignment Help, 2022, https://myassignment.live/free-samples/acct2023-accounting-principles-ii/financial-statements-of-the-business-file-A1D39FE.html.
My Assignment Help (2022) Accounting Principles II [Online]. Available from: https://myassignment.live/free-samples/acct2023-accounting-principles-ii/financial-statements-of-the-business-file-A1D39FE.html
[Accessed 06 September 2022].
My Assignment Help. 'Accounting Principles II' (My Assignment Help, 2022) < https://myassignment.live/free-samples/acct2023-accounting-principles-ii/financial-statements-of-the-business-file-A1D39FE.html> accessed 06 September 2022.
My Assignment Help. Accounting Principles II [Internet]. My Assignment Help. 2022 [cited 06 September 2022]. Available from: https://myassignment.live/free-samples/acct2023-accounting-principles-ii/financial-statements-of-the-business-file-A1D39FE.html.
Are you confident that you will achieve the grade?
Our best Expert will help you improve your grade
If you are the original writer of this content and no longer wish to have your work published on Myassignment.live then please raise the content removal request.