header-logo header-logo

02 April 2015
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Consumer rights confusion?

Lawyers have raised concerns about the Consumer Rights Act, which passed into law last week.

The Act aims to streamline key consumer rights and remedies when goods are faulty. It also covers unfair contract terms, uncompetitive action by businesses, consumer rights over digital content and refunds for services that do not match up to expectation.

Businesses have until 1 October to implement the Act and educate staff about the changes.

However, Nicky Strong, regulatory lawyer at law firm Bond Dickinson says: “The headlines suggest that the changes are largely a matter of common sense but the devil is in the detail and the main concern around the Act is how the enforcement and remedies sections are going to work in practice.

“Under the new changes, consumers will have the right to a reduction in the price or to reject the goods after only one unsuccessful repair or replacement. This is one part that is causing some significant uncertainty. Businesses are already expressing concerns as to how they should approach customer complaints and what remedies can be used and when.

“It is clear that greater clarity is still required on certain aspects of the Act and how it will operate, and with only six months and a General Election to go, it may be cutting it fine for the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (Bis) to produce guidance which is helpful at a practical level.”

It is understood that Bis will engage more fully with businesses between the election and 1 October, when the Act comes into force.

Issue: 7647 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll