Then the consequences for recovering and claiming damages with respect to the sale of goods under a hire purchase agreement will be discussed.
The first problem of note appears to be a case of misrepresentation. Keith, the sales agent with whom Vic and Gaynor negotiated the purchase of the sofa from Funky Furniture with, represented to the couple that the sofa would fit through the internal doors of their home. This concern appeared to be a pre-condition of the contract for the sale of the sofa. Having convinced the pair that the sofa would fit through the internal doors of their home, Vic and Gaynor decided to enter into a hire purchase agreement for the purchase of the sofa.
Under the law of contract, misrepresentation arises in situations where there is a communication of false facts which have the effect of inducing the party who is receiving the false representation to enter into legal obligations.1 A Misrepresentation can be made either negligently, fraudulently or innocently. The extent of the applicable remedies in respect of misrepresentation will depend on the type of misrepresentation made.2 In a typical case where misrepresentation is substantiated, the innocent party can if he/she desires, rescind the contract and/or make a claim for concurrent damages.3
Vic is required to prove that she relied on Keith’s misrepresentation or that she was induced to enter into the contract because of Keith’s misrepresentation.4 If however, Vic relied on her own judgment with respect to the sofa being able to fit into the internal doors of her home she cannot claim that she relied on Keith’s misrepresentation.5 On the facts of the case for discussion however, it appears that Vic did not rely on her own judgment since she questioned whether or not the sofa would fit into the interior doors. It was only after Keith assured her that it would that she entered into the contract for the purchase of the sofa.