Law 2050 Consumers and the Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Law 2050 Consumers and the Law - Essay ExampleHence, today in order to protect the rights of the customers who are the consumers of the product and services, we have the consumer rights. The consumer Rights says that if a customer buys a product and is not satisfied with the quality or if it does not fit into the requirement of using the product or has a false claim, then he has the right to recourse either by getting the product repaired, replaced or a refunded depending on the concern and the degree of dissatisfaction by the customer. These rights also cover service contracts and online shopping also. The Abuzaid vs. niggle Care U.K. Ltd is a perfect example of violation of Consumer Rights. To understand the main issues of the case, a brief compend of the history describing the background is essential. The product, Cosy toes which is a sleeping bag which is primarily used for children and infants to attach the chewy straps with the push-chair, was brought by the mother of the cl aimant for his brother. It consisted on two plastic straps which were supposed to be fastened around the progress chair securing the back of the person. The elastic strap (almost 7-8 inches long) had to be joined with the metal buckle. While attaching the buckle of the straps to the chair, the elastic straps slipped past the hand and the buckle had made a direct hit in his eye thereby causing a permanent injury. The accident was so serious that he had to be immediately interpreted to the emergency department of the hospital by ambulance. Hence, after nearly escaping to loose ones sens a positive step to appeal for the Consumer tribute law was taken. A case was filed against Mothercare Ltd, UK under the Consumer Protection Act and the claim against damage under the Common Law of negligence on the part of the vendor of the good. It was claimed that the cause of the injury was primarily because of the defective nature of the product and the manufacturer of the producer should have been painful enough to foresee such implications causing such serious damage to the individual(a) and hence the listless claim was made under the Common law of negligence. The Common law of negligence states that if any individual has suffered an injury due to the negligence of another person. However, certain conditions need to be made to substantiate the article of the Act. The plaintiff must be able to substantiate proofs like failure to establish reasonable care, remedy that has been made which is other than economic losses. Thus in order to be eligible for this claim the claimant has to pass on proofs that the individual had suffered proofs that the individual had suffered personal injury or loss which was evitable as per the claim of Abouzaid ,the diseased person of the accident.. The defendant on the other hand claimed that the incident that had occurred was a sort of contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. According to this Act the defence can retort on th e claim made by the claimant on negligence that the damage or injury was cause to the individual due to his or her accept personal negligence and hence the manufacturer or the seller of the particular product could not be blamed or penalised for it. Mother care agued that the product cannot be claimed to be defective in the kickoff instance. This is because when the particular product was made available to the customers, no such previous instances of injury had been reported. Further, at the beat when the accident had occurred, in 1990, the consumers could also not expect quite understandably and