Authorized consultants have mentioned that current legal guidelines are enough to guard shoppers, due to this fact there is no such thing as a must rush the lemon legislation which is being thought of for autos consumers, reported The Star.
Present client 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 client 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 supply shoppers recourse for faulty items, particular provisions required amendments for higher safety, Salim mentioned. “It’s crucial to fine-tune current legal guidelines by the use 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 dwelling (KPDN) launched two interim methods geared toward defending shoppers relating to the correct to say 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 have been highlighted by Salim, specifically the absence of a transparent definition of merchantable high quality as acknowledged underneath Part 16 of the Sale of Items Act. Whereas the CPA gives supplementary client safety, the act additionally permits events to override client rights by way of particular agreements which weaken its effectiveness in some circumstances, Salim added.
On this, Salim cited the case of Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd v NZ Wheels Sdn Bhd in 2012, wherein the court docket voided the contract over a faulty automotive that failed to fulfill acceptable high quality requirements underneath Part 12 (2) of the Shopper Safety Act.
Part 51 of the CPA didn’t supply redress in opposition to 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 shoppers, thus limiting collective motion.
In the meantime, Datuk Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor, who can also be a former Bar Council president, voiced his assist for a lemon legislation particularly for autos. Whereas the CPA and Sale of Items Act supply some client safety, they lack specifics in addressing recurring automobile defects which depart shoppers with out clear treatments.
Abdul Fareed, who led the Malaysian Bar from 2019 to 2020, highlighted the absence of guarantee requirements and restore cut-off dates, which regularly left shoppers ready for prolonged durations for repairs with out a correct framework for claiming damages. “We want clearer guarantee requirements and cheap restore cut-off dates,” he mentioned.
The ability disparity between shoppers and huge automotive firms complicates efforts for a client to say their rights underneath the CPA, the place negotiating repairs of refunds might be troublesome, resulting in dissatisfaction and disputes.
A lemon legislation usually shifted the burden of proof to the producer as soon as a automobile was deemed faulty, forcing firms to behave in good religion whereas offering stronger client safety with out extended authorized battles, Abdul Fareed mentioned.
“Introducing a lemon legislation will supply clearer treatments and shift the burden of proof to producers, giving shoppers extra safety,” Abdul Fareed mentioned.
Whereas there are undoubtedly potential advantages of a lemon legislation, he warned of unintended penalties equivalent to elevated litigation and better prices for each companies and shoppers. “Cautious implementation with clear tips is important to steadiness client rights with enterprise pursuits and keep away from a adverse financial impression,” he added.
Trying to promote your automotive? Promote it with Carro.
