Law Commission Recommends Crackdown on Civil Recovery

[bluebottle]

The Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission has, today, published a joint report to Parliament on redress for consumers who enter into contracts or make payments as a result of misleading or aggressive practices by retailers. The Commissions recommend that the right to redress (in the Government's proposed Consumer Bill of Rights) should explicitly cover misleading or aggressive demands for payment issued in relation to, for example, alleged copyright infringement or shoplifting

You can find the lengthy report at Consumer Redress for Misleading and Aggressive Practices - Law Commission


A summary of the report can be found at http://thejusticegap.com/News/unreas...r-allegations/

Information provided by Richard Dunstan, Social Policy Officer, Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB)

[Celestine]

Re: Law Commission Recommends Crackdown on Civil Recovery

UNFAIR PAYMENT COLLECTION (Part 9)

1. S.44 There is uncertainty about how far the Regulations cover misleading oraggressive demands for payment. They clearly include demands made followinga sale but problems arise in other contexts. For example, consumers accused ofcopyright infringement or shoplifting, or those who have had their car towed,might be misled or pressured into paying significant sums of money.
   
2. S.45 We recommend that the Regulations should be amended to clarify that allcommercial demands for payment are included within the definition of commercialpractices. There was strong support for this, to protect consumers and to ensureconsistency and clarity.
   
3. S.46 We also recommend that the new right to redress should include misleading oraggressive demands for payment. The many examples submitted by consumergroups illustrate that consumers would benefit from clearer and more certainrights to redress in these cases.
   
4. S.47 Where there has been an unfair demand for money and the money was notowed, the consumer would be entitled to a refund. Where it was owed, theconsumer would not be entitled to a refund but would be able to claim for provenconsequential losses, together with limited damages for proven distress andinconvenience.