Manufacturers Liability in Great Dunmow

Manufacturers liability in Great Dunmow and throughout the UK is a key issue for businesses. A friend of mine recently came to me and said that one of his customers was holding his business liable as the manufacturer for the claims they had had against their products from consumers so I thought I would talk to you a bit about manufacturers liability now. This is because there are also various good arguments for making a manufacturer liable for the quality of the goods AS WELL AS the party who actually sells the goods to the consumer.

A separate point is whether manufacturers should be liable to the consumer for promises and statements made in relation to the goods. As indicated above manufacturers are not usually found liable in contract or tort for advertising statements; although it is arguable that they should be. Of course, those who actually sell directly to the consumer are now potentially liable to consumers for statements emanating from the manufacturer even where the seller did not pass the statement on.

Manufacturers are liable for express promises made in formal guarantees and ‘associated advertising’. This is as a result of 15 of the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002. Where goods are sold or supplied to a consumer with such a guarantee, the guarantee is deemed to take effect at the time of delivery ‘as a contractual obligation owed by the guarantor under the conditions set out in the guarantee statement and the associated advertising’. There were always questions in English law as to whether a consumer had in every case provided consideration to the manufacturer for the guarantee so as to make it enforceable as a contract. It is helpful, therefore, that the liability is now on a clear statutory footing.

However, what is of particular interest is that what is binding are the ‘conditions laid down in the guarantee statement and the associated advertising.’ Presumably what is meant here is that statements in leaflets, brochures and general advertising which add to or elaborate upon the formal contents of the guarantee should be binding along with these formal contents. This could expand the range of statements for which sellers and producers will be liable, especially within systems (such as those within the UK) which have been very reluctant to impose liability for producer’s statements. Of course, this provision goes further than the provision discussed above which makes producers’ advertising statements relevant to the overall assessment of the satisfactory quality obligation owed by the seller. An advertising statement will only be one factor to be taken into account in deciding on whether the goods are of satisfactory quality. However, the provision in relation to guarantees now under discussion seems to create ‘stand alone’ liability for advertising statements which are associated with guarantees.

Nevertheless, the provision may actually go further than is obvious at first glance. Perhaps there is liability even where the advertising statement does not actually build on a particular provision in the formal guarantee. Rather there may be liability where the statement makes a ‘guarantee’ type promise itself, or even just a statement of fact? Does there even need to be a guarantee? Can the statement be one that is ‘associated’ simply with the goods? If so, then it may be that there is now, in fact, direct manufacturer liability for advertising statements. This would clearly reflect the reliance that is placed on manufacturer’s advertising by consumers. There might, indeed, be attractions to the consumer in taking action against the producer in cases where the complaint is not one relating to quality in a general sense; but rather simply that the goods do not live up to a particular statement in the producer’s advertising. It must be remembered that the action against the seller is based on a general quality problem. A statement made by the producer may be incorrect, but this will not, in itself, guarantee that the goods will be of unsatisfactory quality. The expectations raised by a statement are only one factor to be taken into account in deciding whether the goods are in conformity (or are of satisfactory quality). There may be an incorrect statement, but it may be concluded, on an overall assessment of the goods, that they are in conformity / are of satisfactory quality.

Contact Andrew Douglas Wills and Legal Services today via www.andrewdouglaswills.co.uk to see how we could help you with the matter of manufacturers liability in Great Dunmow and throughout Essex for businesses.

Follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ADouglasWills.

Follow us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/AndrewDouglasWills.