No supplier is the organisation that supplies the vehicle i.e. dealership, lease company hire purchase etcJust clarify your reference to the "supplier". Did you mean the retailer of the car i.e the dealer?
No supplier is the organisation that supplies the vehicle i.e. dealership, lease company hire purchase etcJust clarify your reference to the "supplier". Did you mean the retailer of the car i.e the dealer?
In which case the CRA would not apply, as the CRA is only relevant to the contract the buyer has with the retailer or finance house if one has been used for the purchase. Manufacturers are not affected by th e CRA, unless they sell goods direct.No supplier is the organisation that supplies the vehicle i.e. dealership, lease company hire purchase etc
And we have now gone full circle.If an insurance company fails to include a relevant question in their application form, whether online or not, then they should bear the consequences, not the policyholder.
Yet until this year not one Insurer defined the kind of subject matter they wanted disclosed.The Consumer Insurance Act came into force on April 6th 2013
What the Consumer Insurance Act means for customers | ABI
The Consumer Insurance Act came into force on 6th April 2013www.abi.org.uk
Quote "your insurer will have to ask you specific questions to obtain relevant information about your circumstances when you buy insurance. The Consumer Insurance Act will give you legal protection if you unknowingly give incorrect or incomplete information to your insurer. This means your insurer will not be able to decline a claim on the grounds off non-disclosure unless you carelessly or deliberately lied or misrepresented your circumstances"
Who mentioned that the manufacturer was liable? It is always the supplier that is liable as contract is with supplier and consumer.In which case the CRA would not apply, as the CRA is only relevant to the contract the buyer has with the retailer or finance house if one has been used for the purchase. Manufacturers are not affected by th e CRA, unless they sell goods direct.
Lose use of the term "supplier" causing misunderstandings, as here and with much else the retailer purchased from is only one element in supplying.Who mentioned that the manufacturer was liable? It is always the supplier that is liable as contract is with supplier and consumer.
Happy Christmas...I would have thought that it would be easier and less ambiguous if one talked about the two parties to the contract. The contract is between the customer and the dealer or whoever is handing over ownership. In that case it should be fairly obvious that it’s not the car manufacturer.
Is a finance house a "trader"?Happy Christmas...
The CRA is specifically related to the retail seller to the end user or Consumer, thus its important to define the parties, for the exact reason JTQ in #132 points out.
The terms used to define the parties in the contract are "Consumer" and "Trader"
Don’t we need to differentiate between CRA 2015 and The Consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 75?Is a finance house a "trader"?
According to the prof a finance house is a trader???? Not sure why he has even mentioned the manufacturer as a supplier when the discussion or thread concerns a consumer being supplied and not a dealership being supplied. Maybe enjoying the Christmas spirit too much. LOL! 🤣 🤣Don’t we need to differentiate between CRA 2015 and The Consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 75?
I don’t see how The Finance Company can be the Trader?
It depends on the type of finance - if it's Hire Purchase (HP) or Leasing then you don't buy the product at the beginning, indeed with leasing you never own it.According to the prof a finance house is a trader???? Not sure why he has even mentioned the manufacturer as a supplier when the discussion or thread concerns a consumer being supplied and not a dealership being supplied. Maybe enjoying the Christmas spirit too much. LOL! 🤣 🤣
Not sure what that has to do with question as either way the finance house is still the supplier and the one liable under CRA 2015?It depends on the type of finance - if it's Hire Purchase (HP) or Leasing then you don't buy the product at the beginning, indeed with leasing you never own it.
If you don't own it then there's no seller involved in CRA 2015.Not sure what that has to do with question as either way the finance house is still the supplier and the one liable under CRA 2015?
Roger I am very surprised that you think there is no seller involved and think that CRA 2015 is not involved if using finance. Anyway thanks for cheering up a dull day with a good laugh. 🤣 🤣If you don't own it then there's no seller involved in CRA 2015.
There's no seller if the product isn't sold - there's clearly a supplier but no seller (as far as the consumer is concerned) - so the use of "seller" can be misleading in the CRA context.Roger I am very surprised that you think there is no seller involved and think that CRA 2015 is not involved if using finance. Anyway thanks for cheering up a dull day with a good laugh. 🤣 🤣
No idea what you are on about as you seemed to have gone off on a real tangent, but whatever makes you happy that is al that counts.There's no seller if the product isn't sold - there's clearly a supplier but no seller (as far as the consumer is concerned) - so the use of "seller" can be misleading in the CRA context.
One of the ways that JLR keeps their sales volume up is their "management" car scheme, available to everyone from supervisors upwards, typically replaced every 6 months and sold as nearly new but at significant discount from list price - the scheme includes all their ex-managers in retirement.Where did we go wrong Hutch?
How come our kids are driving the crème de la crème and we are in the old faithfuls🙀
Oh yes very true, not a bad car for a 40 year old, last Christmas Eve.One of the ways that JLR keeps their sales volume up is their "management" car scheme, available to everyone from supervisors upwards, typically replaced every 6 months and sold as nearly new but at significant discount from list price - the scheme includes all their ex-managers in retirement.
At that list price you'd expect it to beat a Santa Fe - good luck with maintaining a used Defender.Oh yes very true, not a bad car for a 40 year old, last Christmas Eve.
asked him about theft, he mentioned that owners just walk away from them, and do not deploy the full lock system.
Hate to say it, beats My Santa Fe, into the ground.
87k, next year he can buy it for me for 45k.