Even though it extends the two-stage chain of remedies in Art.3 of the Consumer Rights Directive, this Article is an absolute revision of the former provision. The pressing consequence is that the new proviso is possibly less composite and thus easier to read; but the benefit is simply outbalanced by the substantial alterations made to the remedies. Many of these remedies are or may be detriment to the consumers. Actually, it is in the background of the remedies where user protection would be trimmed back under the proposed Consumer Rights Directive full harmonisation scheme.
Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 the purchasers’ right to a refund is restricted by Section 11 (4). This section states that the right to reject the goods by the purchaser depends on his acceptance of the goods. But as soon as acceptance takes place then the contract is complete and this will reduce the buyer’s right to a lesser claim of damages. Once acceptance has taken place, the buyer’s contractual claim is reduced to breach of warranty affording the buyer the lesser claim of damages. These are assessed as the difference in the value of the goods at the time of delivery and the value they would have had if they had conformed to the contract. In practice, these will usually amount to the cost of repairs. Claims for consequential losses are also allowed in accordance with the principles of the general law of contract.
The meaning of acceptance is given under SS 34 and 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Section 34 calls for the vendor, on petition, to provide the buyer a reasonable chance to inspect the goods. Section 35 lays down the rules for acceptance which can be completed in three ways:
With regard to consumer transactions, the third kind, that is acceptance after the lapse of a reasonable time, is a very common type of acceptance. The query of what is a reasonable time is a problem of fact. Conversely, a