Authorized consultants have mentioned that present legal guidelines are ample to guard customers, subsequently there is no such thing as a must rush the lemon legislation which is being thought of for automobiles consumers, reported The Star.
Present shopper safety legal guidelines, such because the Sale of Items Act 1957, Shopper Safety Act 1999 (CPA), Contract Act 1950, Management of Provides Act 1961, and Rent Buy Act 1967 might be strengthened to boost shopper safety, in line with former president of the Malaysian Bar Salim Bashir who led the Bar Council from 2020 to 2021.
Whereas these legal guidelines provide customers recourse for faulty items, particular provisions required amendments for higher safety, Salim mentioned. “It’s crucial to fine-tune present legal guidelines by means of amendments with out introducing a brand new lemon legislation in Parliament,” he mentioned.
Earlier this month, the ministry of home commerce and value of residing (KPDN) launched two interim methods aimed toward defending customers relating to the precise to assert compensation for faulty or defective merchandise – significantly for motorized vehicle purchases – earlier than a brand new authorized framework earlier than the proposed lemon legislation is finalised, in line with its minister Armizan Mohd Ali.
A number of shortcomings had been highlighted by Salim, particularly the absence of a transparent definition of merchantable high quality as acknowledged underneath Part 16 of the Sale of Items Act. Whereas the CPA provides supplementary shopper safety, the act additionally permits events to override shopper rights by particular agreements which weaken its effectiveness in some instances, Salim added.
On this, Salim cited the case of Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd v NZ Wheels Sdn Bhd in 2012, through which the courtroom voided the contract over a faulty automobile that failed to fulfill acceptable high quality requirements underneath Part 12 (2) of the Shopper Safety Act.
Part 51 of the CPA didn’t provide redress towards producers if defects arose from exterior components after the product has left the manufacturing facility, and the CPA additionally didn’t permit curiosity teams to file lawsuits on behalf of customers, thus limiting collective motion.
In the meantime, Datuk Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor, who can also be a former Bar Council president, voiced his help for a lemon legislation particularly for automobiles. Whereas the CPA and Sale of Items Act provide some shopper safety, they lack specifics in addressing recurring car defects which depart customers with out clear cures.
Abdul Fareed, who led the Malaysian Bar from 2019 to 2020, highlighted the absence of guarantee requirements and restore closing dates, which frequently left customers ready for prolonged intervals for repairs with out a correct framework for claiming damages. “We want clearer guarantee requirements and affordable restore closing dates,” he mentioned.
The ability disparity between customers and huge automotive corporations complicates efforts for a shopper to claim their rights underneath the CPA, the place negotiating repairs of refunds might be tough, resulting in dissatisfaction and disputes.
A lemon legislation usually shifted the burden of proof to the producer as soon as a car was deemed faulty, forcing corporations to behave in good religion whereas offering stronger shopper safety with out extended authorized battles, Abdul Fareed mentioned.
“Introducing a lemon legislation will provide clearer cures and shift the burden of proof to producers, giving customers extra safety,” Abdul Fareed mentioned.
Whereas there are undoubtedly potential advantages of a lemon legislation, he warned of unintended penalties similar to elevated litigation and better prices for each companies and customers. “Cautious implementation with clear pointers is important to steadiness shopper rights with enterprise pursuits and keep away from a damaging financial influence,” he added.
Trying to promote your automobile? Promote it with Carro.
