Authorized specialists have mentioned that current legal guidelines are adequate to guard customers, subsequently there is no such thing as a have to rush the lemon legislation which is being thought-about for autos consumers, reported The Star.
Current client safety legal guidelines, such because the Sale of Items Act 1957, Client Safety Act 1999 (CPA), Contract Act 1950, Management of Provides Act 1961, and Rent Buy Act 1967 might be strengthened to reinforce client safety, based on former president of the Malaysian Bar Salim Bashir who led the Bar Council from 2020 to 2021.
Whereas these legal guidelines supply customers recourse for faulty items, particular provisions required amendments for higher safety, Salim mentioned. “It’s crucial to fine-tune current 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 concerning the fitting to assert compensation for faulty or defective merchandise – notably for motorcar purchases – earlier than a brand new authorized framework earlier than the proposed lemon legislation is finalised, based on its minister Armizan Mohd Ali.
A number of shortcomings have been highlighted by Salim, particularly the absence of a transparent definition of merchantable high quality as said below Part 16 of the Sale of Items Act. Whereas the CPA affords supplementary client safety, the act additionally permits events to override client rights by way of 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, during which the court docket voided the contract over a faulty automobile that failed to satisfy acceptable high quality requirements below Part 12 (2) of the Client Safety Act.
Part 51 of the CPA didn’t supply redress towards producers if defects arose from exterior components after the product has left the manufacturing unit, 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 be a former Bar Council president, voiced his help 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 car defects which go away customers with out clear treatments.
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 durations for repairs with out a correct framework for claiming damages. “We’d like clearer guarantee requirements and affordable restore closing dates,” he mentioned.
The ability disparity between customers and huge automotive corporations complicates efforts for a client to claim their rights below the CPA, the place negotiating repairs of refunds might be tough, resulting in dissatisfaction and disputes.
A lemon legislation sometimes 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 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 customers 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 customers. “Cautious implementation with clear tips is important to stability client rights with enterprise pursuits and keep away from a unfavourable financial influence,” he added.
Trying to promote your automobile? Promote it with Carro.
