THE CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT EC4009NI
30% INDIVIDUAL COURSEWORK
2018-19 AUTUMN
Student Name:
London Met ID:
College ID:
Assignment Due Date:
Assignment Submission Date:
Word Count:
I confirm that I understand my coursework needs to be submitted online via Google Classroom under the relevant module page before the deadline in order for my assignment to be accepted and marked. I am fully aware that late submissions will be treated as non-submission and a marks of zero will be awarded.
The Corporate Environment
EC4009NI | 1
Cover sheet
Student Identification Number:
Submission Deadline:
WORD MARGIN:
Font Type/size:
Times new roman/12
Line spacing:
1.5
Referencing:
Harvard style
Bibliography:
Full bibliography at the end of the written work
Cases cited:
–
Statutes cited:
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015)
Sections of Statutes:
1. S.9(2)(a),(3)(b)(c)
2. S.11(3) (b)
3. S.14(2)
4. S.20(7) (a)
5. S.21(11)
6. S.62(2) (4)
7. S.65(2)
Q 1) Discuss to what extent the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 have been breached and what possible remedies might be available to Arthur.
SUMMARY OF RELEVANT FACTS
· Homespace Ltd., a multinational furniture company had failed to meet the description and the quality of the products as ordered by Arthur, who is the plaintiff seeking a legal solution for his loss.
· Arthur had purchased eight pinewood kitchen cabinets, table and six chairs, which he had requested to be light for his kids but, he received cabinets made of oak wood which had minor defects and chairs heavier than he had requested for.
· Arthur paid £1000 on total for the goods to Homespace Ltd.
· Due to defective and irrelevant goods, Arthur intends to return the delivered goods and get a refund but is unsure because of the notice regarding the no replacement and refund policy posted in the showrooms counter.
ISSUE
· Arthur didnt receive the products as per his description, so he wants to return the products and get a refund.
· The main issue is whether Homespace Ltd. had breached the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and if it is liable to provide remedies to Arthur.
· Section 9, Section 11, Section 14 and Section 20 of the Act contains components that associate with this issue (Parliament of the United Kingdom, 2015)
are
· There is no evidence whether Arthur had a quick glance at the products or had examined the goods thoroughly at the store before purchasing them.
RULE
· Section 9 of the Act
· S.9 (2) The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of-
· (a) any description of the goods
· S.9 (3) The quality of goods includes their state and condition, and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods
· (b) appearance and finish,
· (c) freedom from minor defects.
· Section 11 of the Act
· S.11 (3) A supply of goods is not prevented from being a supply by description just because
· (b) They are selected by the consumer.
· Section 14 of the Act
· S.14 (2) Every contract to which this section applies is to be treated as including a term that the goods will match the model except to the extent that any differences between the model and the goods are brought to the consumers attention before the consumer enters into the contract.
· Section 20 of the Act
· S.20 (7) From the time when the right is exercised
· (a) The trader has a duty to give the consumer a refund, subject to subsection (18).
· S.20 (7)(a)(18) There is no entitlement to receive a refund
· (a) if none of subsections (10) to (12) applies,
· (b) to the extent that anything to which subsection (12) applies cannot be given back in its original state, or
· (c) where subsection (13) applies, to the extent that anything the consumer transferred under the contract cannot be divided so as to give back only the amount, or part of the amount, to which the consumer is entitled.
APPLICATION
· With reference to S.9 (2a, 3b, 3c), the quality of goods delivered to Arthur is considered to be unsatisfactory.
· Arthur had purchased eight pine wood kitchen cabinets and six chairs which he had requested to be lighter for his kids. Instead, he received eight oak wood cabinets and chairs which were heavy for his children.
· Some units of the kitchen cabinets had minor scratches, some appeared to be discoloured and doors didnt close properly.
· As per, S.11 (3) (b), the company is not prevented from being liable just because the goods were selected by Arthur.
· The company also violated the Consumer Rights Act 2015 under S.14 (2).
· As it had failed to match the product like the one which was showcased in the showroom.
you are assuming Arthur bought the floor sample
· But, there is a missing information, whether Arthur had had a close view of the products, especially the chairs, or not before purchasing them. As it was the responsibility and right of the buyer to examine and choose the desired product.
· Under S.20 (7) (a), Arthur is able to return the products and get a refund.
· None of the terms of S.20 (18) matches the issue as Arthur had paid money as per the rate and the products can be given back in its original state.
· But, if Arthur takes a long period of time to return, it may hamper the amount of refund he would receive.
CONCLUSION
· Analysing the above-mentioned sections of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Arthurs side seems to be stronger than that of the Homespace Ltd.
· Homespace Ltd. breached the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, creating discomfort to Arthur. He lost a huge chunk of money (£1000) and received different and faulty products.
· Despite the no return and refund notice posted at the store, Homespace Ltd. is liable to take the returns and give remedies to Arthur due to the unfair treatment by the company.
· But, the extent of remedy to be given to Arthur is uncertain since the terms of the contract between Arthur and the company is not revealed.
· The company has been facing a lot of complaints, so fulfilling the genuine desire of the customer would be a rational decision to save the companys reputation and maintain its goodwill.
· Arthur intends to receive a refund, so the company can correct its mistake by fulfilling the genuine desire of Arthur.
· If the multinational company, had focused on the description of its client, and if Arthur had properly examined the products before delivery, the legal issue might not have been raised.
Precise identification of the legal issue.
Precise identification of all the relevant areas of law.
Demonstration of a thorough knowledge and understanding of the relevant principles and case law including a critical analysis thereof.
Accurate application of law to question so as to address precisely legal issues raised therein.
Use of authority (that is, cases and statutes) to support the arguments advanced and conclusions reached.
Presentation of work which is legible.
Clarity of expression
75/100
A-
Detailed Bibliography Statutory Law
1. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.9(2a,3b, 3c) page no.5
2. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.11(3) (b) page no.6
3. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.14(2) page no.7
4. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.20(7) (a) page no.11
5. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.21(11) page no.13
6. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 5, S.62(2) (4) page no.37
7. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 5, S.65(2) page no.3
Applied Sciences
Architecture and Design
Biology
Business & Finance
Chemistry
Computer Science
Geography
Geology
Education
Engineering
English
Environmental science
Spanish
Government
History
Human Resource Management
Information Systems
Law
Literature
Mathematics
Nursing
Physics
Political Science
Psychology
Reading
Science
Social Science
Home
Blog
Archive
Essay
Reviews
Contact
google+twitterfacebook
Copyright © 2019 HomeworkMarket.comHOMEWORKMARKET.COM YOUR HOMEWORK ANSWERSHomeworkMarket
Home.Homework Answers.
Help.
Log in / Sign up
Capstone
profile
Sandeepkhanal
Studentsample.docx
Home>Business & Finance homework help>Capstone
THE CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT EC4009NI
30% INDIVIDUAL COURSEWORK
2018-19 AUTUMN
Student Name:
London Met ID:
College ID:
Assignment Due Date:
Assignment Submission Date:
Word Count:
I confirm that I understand my coursework needs to be submitted online via Google Classroom under the relevant module page before the deadline in order for my assignment to be accepted and marked. I am fully aware that late submissions will be treated as non-submission and a marks of zero will be awarded.
The Corporate Environment
EC4009NI | 1
Cover sheet
Student Identification Number:
Submission Deadline:
WORD MARGIN:
Font Type/size:
Times new roman/12
Line spacing:
1.5
Referencing:
Harvard style
Bibliography:
Full bibliography at the end of the written work
Cases cited:
–
Statutes cited:
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015)
Sections of Statutes:
1. S.9(2)(a),(3)(b)(c)
2. S.11(3) (b)
3. S.14(2)
4. S.20(7) (a)
5. S.21(11)
6. S.62(2) (4)
7. S.65(2)
Q 1) Discuss to what extent the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 have been breached and what possible remedies might be available to Arthur.
SUMMARY OF RELEVANT FACTS
· Homespace Ltd., a multinational furniture company had failed to meet the description and the quality of the products as ordered by Arthur, who is the plaintiff seeking a legal solution for his loss.
· Arthur had purchased eight pinewood kitchen cabinets, table and six chairs, which he had requested to be light for his kids but, he received cabinets made of oak wood which had minor defects and chairs heavier than he had requested for.
· Arthur paid £1000 on total for the goods to Homespace Ltd.
· Due to defective and irrelevant goods, Arthur intends to return the delivered goods and get a refund but is unsure because of the notice regarding the no replacement and refund policy posted in the showrooms counter.
ISSUE
· Arthur didnt receive the products as per his description, so he wants to return the products and get a refund.
· The main issue is whether Homespace Ltd. had breached the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and if it is liable to provide remedies to Arthur.
· Section 9, Section 11, Section 14 and Section 20 of the Act contains components that associate with this issue (Parliament of the United Kingdom, 2015)
are
· There is no evidence whether Arthur had a quick glance at the products or had examined the goods thoroughly at the store before purchasing them.
RULE
· Section 9 of the Act
· S.9 (2) The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of-
· (a) any description of the goods
· S.9 (3) The quality of goods includes their state and condition, and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods
· (b) appearance and finish,
· (c) freedom from minor defects.
· Section 11 of the Act
· S.11 (3) A supply of goods is not prevented from being a supply by description just because
· (b) They are selected by the consumer.
· Section 14 of the Act
· S.14 (2) Every contract to which this section applies is to be treated as including a term that the goods will match the model except to the extent that any differences between the model and the goods are brought to the consumers attention before the consumer enters into the contract.
· Section 20 of the Act
· S.20 (7) From the time when the right is exercised
· (a) The trader has a duty to give the consumer a refund, subject to subsection (18).
· S.20 (7)(a)(18) There is no entitlement to receive a refund
· (a) if none of subsections (10) to (12) applies,
· (b) to the extent that anything to which subsection (12) applies cannot be given back in its original state, or
· (c) where subsection (13) applies, to the extent that anything the consumer transferred under the contract cannot be divided so as to give back only the amount, or part of the amount, to which the consumer is entitled.
APPLICATION
· With reference to S.9 (2a, 3b, 3c), the quality of goods delivered to Arthur is considered to be unsatisfactory.
· Arthur had purchased eight pine wood kitchen cabinets and six chairs which he had requested to be lighter for his kids. Instead, he received eight oak wood cabinets and chairs which were heavy for his children.
· Some units of the kitchen cabinets had minor scratches, some appeared to be discoloured and doors didnt close properly.
· As per, S.11 (3) (b), the company is not prevented from being liable just because the goods were selected by Arthur.
· The company also violated the Consumer Rights Act 2015 under S.14 (2).
· As it had failed to match the product like the one which was showcased in the showroom.
you are assuming Arthur bought the floor sample
· But, there is a missing information, whether Arthur had had a close view of the products, especially the chairs, or not before purchasing them. As it was the responsibility and right of the buyer to examine and choose the desired product.
· Under S.20 (7) (a), Arthur is able to return the products and get a refund.
· None of the terms of S.20 (18) matches the issue as Arthur had paid money as per the rate and the products can be given back in its original state.
· But, if Arthur takes a long period of time to return, it may hamper the amount of refund he would receive.
CONCLUSION
· Analysing the above-mentioned sections of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Arthurs side seems to be stronger than that of the Homespace Ltd.
· Homespace Ltd. breached the terms implied by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, creating discomfort to Arthur. He lost a huge chunk of money (£1000) and received different and faulty products.
· Despite the no return and refund notice posted at the store, Homespace Ltd. is liable to take the returns and give remedies to Arthur due to the unfair treatment by the company.
· But, the extent of remedy to be given to Arthur is uncertain since the terms of the contract between Arthur and the company is not revealed.
· The company has been facing a lot of complaints, so fulfilling the genuine desire of the customer would be a rational decision to save the companys reputation and maintain its goodwill.
· Arthur intends to receive a refund, so the company can correct its mistake by fulfilling the genuine desire of Arthur.
· If the multinational company, had focused on the description of its client, and if Arthur had properly examined the products before delivery, the legal issue might not have been raised.
Precise identification of the legal issue.
Precise identification of all the relevant areas of law.
Demonstration of a thorough knowledge and understanding of the relevant principles and case law including a critical analysis thereof.
Accurate application of law to question so as to address precisely legal issues raised therein.
Use of authority (that is, cases and statutes) to support the arguments advanced and conclusions reached.
Presentation of work which is legible.
Clarity of expression
75/100
A-
Detailed Bibliography Statutory Law
1. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.9(2a,3b, 3c) page no.5
2. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.11(3) (b) page no.6
3. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.14(2) page no.7
4. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.20(7) (a) page no.11
5. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 2, S.21(11) page no.13
6. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 5, S.62(2) (4) page no.37
7. Consumer Rights Act 2015, Chapter 5, S.65(2) page no.3
Applied Sciences
Architecture and Design
Biology
Business & Finance
Chemistry
Computer Science
Geography
Geology
Education
Engineering
English
Environmental science
Spanish
Government
History
Human Resource Management
Information Systems
Law
Literature
Mathematics
Nursing
Physics
Political Science
Psychology
Reading
Science
Social Science
Home
Blog
Archive
Essay
Reviews
Contact
google+twitterfacebook
Copyright © 2019 HomeworkMarket.com
