Law Commission Reforming the law Consumer Redress for Misleading and Aggressive Practices Law Com No 332 / Scot Law Com No 226 The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM No 332) (SCOT LAW COM No 226) CONSUMER REDRESS FOR MISLEADING AND AGGRESSIVE PRACTICES Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice by Command of Her Majesty Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers March 2012 Cm 8323 SG/2012/21 © Crown copyright 2012 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Steel House, 11 Tothill Street, London SW1H 9LJ. This publication is available for download at www.official-documents.gov.uk. ISBN: 9780101832328 Printed in the UK for The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID P002483003 03/12 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. ii The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Right Honourable Lord Justice Munby, Chairman Professor Elizabeth Cooke Mr David Hertzell Professor David Ormerod Miss Frances Patterson QC The Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Elaine Lorimer. The Law Commission is located at Steel House, 11 Tothill Street, London SW1H 9LJ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: Laura J Dunlop QC Patrick Layden QC, TD Professor Hector L MacQueen Dr Andrew J M Steven The Chief Executive of the Scottish Law Commission is Malcolm McMillan. The Scottish Law Commission is located at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh, EH9 1PR. The terms of this report were agreed on 20 February 2012. The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk (See A–Z of projects > Consumer Redress for Misleading and Aggressive Practices) http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk (See News column) iii THE LAW COMMISSION THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION CONSUMER REDRESS FOR MISLEADING AND AGGRESSIVE PRACTICES CONTENTS Paragraph Page SUMMARY viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT xviii PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1 This project 1.5 1 Background 1.7 2 Terms of reference 1.10 3 Preliminary consultation 1.12 4 The consultation proposals 1.17 6 Responses to the Consultation Paper 1.28 7 Where next? 1.40 9 The structure of this Report 1.44 10 Thanks 1.48 11 PART 2: THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR 12 TRADING REGULATIONS 2008 Implementing the European Directive 2.3 12 Scope 2.8 13 Unfair practices 2.12 14 When is a practice misleading or aggressive? 2.16 15 Causing the average consumer’s transactional decision 2.29 17 The “due diligence” defence 2.37 19 iv Paragraph Page Enforcement 2.39 20 Conclusion 2.50 22 PART 3: THE CURRENT LAW: PRIVATE REDRESS FOR 23 MISLEADING AND AGGRESSIVE PRACTICES Private redress for misleading actions 3.3 23 Private redress for misleading omissions 3.33 32 Private redress for aggressive practices 3.49 35 Conclusion 3.72 40 PART 4: THE CASE FOR REFORM 41 Problems with the law on misleading practices 4.5 41 Problems with the law on aggressive practices 4.17 43 Unfair payment collection 4.34 46 A targeted reform 4.40 47 PART 5: RECOMMENDATIONS: AN OVERVIEW 52 A new Act 5.2 52 A targeted reform 5.5 52 The elements of liability 5.6 52 A replacement statute 5.16 54 Remedies 5.18 54 Creditor liability 5.24 56 PART 6: RECOMMENDATIONS I: SCOPE 57 What is a consumer? 6.3 57 Which transactional decisions should give rise to redress? 6.23 61 Against whom should redress be available? 6.61 66 Which products should be covered? 6.93 72 v Paragraph Page PART 7: RECOMMENDATIONS II: LIABILITY 77 Introduction 7.1 77 Misleading omissions 7.3 77 The definition of “misleading” 7.38 83 The definition of aggressive commercial practices 7.62 86 The causation test 7.85 90 The impact on existing law 7.117 94 PART 8: RECOMMENDATIONS III: REMEDIES 98 Reliance damages or expectation damages? 8.3 98 An appropriate balance between certainty and flexibility? 8.16 101 Two tiers of remedies 8.24 102 Tier 1A: the right to unwind 8.27 104 Tier 1B: a discount on the price 8.118 118 Tier 2 remedies 8.142 121 PART 9: UNFAIR PAYMENT COLLECTION 127 Introduction 9.1 127 How consumers are affected 9.9 128 Which collection activities are covered by the Regulations? 9.34 133 Should the Regulations be amended? 9.47 136 Should misleading or aggressive demands for payment be 9.60 138 covered by the new Act? Should demands for damages against alleged wrongdoers be 9.77 142 covered by the new Act? PART 10: CREDITOR LIABILITY 146 Introduction 10.1 146 Direct lending and connected lending 10.5 147 A problem with direct lending 10.6 147 Our proposals: direct lending 10.10 148 Our proposals: connected lending 10.18 149 vi Paragraph Page PART 11: ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF REFORM 155 Benefits 11.4 155 Costs 11.22 158 Conclusion 11.42 161 PART 12: LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS 162 APPENDIX: LIST OF RESPONDENTS 168 vii THE LAW COMMISSION AND THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION CONSUMER REDRESS FOR MISLEADING AND AGGRESSIVE PRACTICES SUMMARY S.1 This Joint Report by the Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission considers the redress available to consumers who have been the victims of misleading or aggressive practices by traders. S.2 Sanctions against such practices are set out in the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (the Regulations).1 The Regulations concern public enforcement rather than private redress. They do not give consumers the right to start civil actions to obtain compensation or other remedies. Instead, consumers must rely on existing private law doctrines, such as the law of misrepresentation and duress. This is problematic: the law of misrepresentation is complex and uncertain; while the law of duress leaves gaps in protection. S.3 Misleading and aggressive trade practices are common and lead to a high level of consumer detriment.2 They are a particular problem for vulnerable consumers. In the course of this project, we were given many examples of elderly consumers who had suffered unscrupulous hard-selling on the doorstep, where, for example, salesmen pretended to be from social services or refused to leave when asked. CALLS FOR REFORM (Part 1) S.4 In 2009, Consumer Focus called for a private right of redress for all consumers who suffered loss through a breach of the Regulations. They pointed out that scams are all too common but relatively few prosecutions are brought. They thought that enforcement would be more effective if public authorities and consumers “worked in tandem”, using both private and public enforcement sanctions.3 1 SI 2008/1277. 2 Consumer Focus, Waiting to be heard: Giving consumers the right of redress over Unfair Commercial Practices (August 2009) p 3. 3 Above. vi ii S.5 These calls were echoed at European level. In 2009, the European Parliament asked member states “to consider the necessity of giving consumers a direct right of redress” to ensure that they are sufficiently protected against unfair commercial practices.4 S.6 In 2010, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) asked the Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission to conduct this review.5 Our aims are: (1) to simplify redress for misleading commercial practices; (2) to simplify redress for aggressive commercial practices; and (3) to fill gaps in protection, where a consumer is unable to gain redress for serious breaches of the Regulations. S.7 This Report does not include a draft Bill, but we understand that our recommendations will be considered as part of the Government’s proposed new Consumer Bill of Rights. THE CURRENT LAW S.8 At present, misleading and aggressive trade practices are covered by two sets of law. One is concerned with public enforcement and the other with private redress. The two systems are completely different: although they both address the same conduct, they use different terminology and concepts and lead to varied outcomes. Public law (Part 2) S.9 The Regulations were introduced in 2008 to implement the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005.6 They replaced 23 previous enactments, including most of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. S.10 Under the Regulations, traders may not engage in misleading or aggressive practices which would be likely to cause “the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise”.7 The terms “the average consumer” and “a transactional decision” follow the wording of the Directive, and implement European law. These concepts seemed strange at first, but enforcement agencies are now becoming more familiar with them, and gradually finding them easier to use. 4 European Parliament Resolution on the Transposition, Implementation and Enforcement of Directive 2005/29/EC and Directive 2006/114/EC OJ C 46 of 13 January 2009, para 12. 5 For the full terms of reference please see paras 1.10 – 1.11 of this Report. 6 Directive 2005/29/EC (OJ 2005 L l49). 7 See for example Regs 5(2)(b) and 7(1)(b). ix
Description: