Traders on wrong side of ‘new’ law

TRADERS have had three years to get used to new consumer laws but are still pleading ignorance or deliberately flouting them.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 consolidated many previous consumer laws, such as the Sale of Goods Act, into a single law.

In theory at least it provided greater protections for the consumer. But from the huge amount of feedback I’ve had, it seems that is not always the case.

Here’s what readers have been telling me. Two days after Gene, from Lancaster, bought a Toyota Yaris at a local garage it turned out to have a major fault. The garage accepted this but said she was entitled only to a repair. This was wrong.

The Consumer Rights Act says that if goods – including cars – are faulty within the first 30 days of purchase, the consumer is entitled to an automatic refund. Paul, from Devon, bought a sofa after seeing the same model in a showroom. When his sofa arrived, it was not the same as the showroom model. The retailer said it was the “revised” version and they had fulfilled their contractual obligations. any differences between the sample and the goods are brought to the consumer’s attention before the contract is made. Richard, from London, downloaded a game online but it kept crashing so he contacted the firm that sold it to him online. providing consumers’ rights with digital downloads. The basic position is that the quality of the digital content of downloads – such as games – must be satisfactory. Richard is entitled to a refund.