Peter Symmons and Co v Cook (1981) 131 NLJ 758
The plaintiff firm of surveyors bought a second-hand Rolls Royce from the defendants which developed serious defects after 2,000. It was held that the firm was acting as a consumer and that to buy in the course of a business 'the buying of cars must form at the very least an integral part of the buyer's business or a necessary incidental thereto'. It was emphasised that only in those circumstances could the buyer be said to be on equal footing with his seller in terms of bargaining strength.
R and B Customs Brokers v United Dominion Trusts Ltd [1988] 1 WLR 321
The plaintiff company, which was a shipping agency, bought a car for a director to be used in business and private use. It had bought cars once or twice before. The sale was arranged by the defendant finance company. The contract excluded the implied conditions about merchantable quality. The car leaked badly.
It was held by the Court of Appeal that where a transaction was only incidental to a business activity, a degree of regularity was required before a transaction could be said to be an integral part of the business carried on and so entered into in the course of that business. Since here the car was only the second or third vehicle acquired by the plaintiffs, there was not a sufficient degree of regularity capable of establishing that the contract was anything more than part of a consumer transaction. Therefore, this was a consumer sale and the implied conditions could not be excluded.
RTA v Gill Draper (Huntingdon County Court 16th September 2009)
It was found that Ms Draper, in signing the contract to appoint RTA as the selling agent for her public house, did so as a consumer as she was not in the business of buying or selling businesses.
1 comment:
foxmoorgarage@hotmail.com
I have been a RTA client AND worked for them as a rep. I decided to take my business off the market WHILST working for them due to no veiwings and they tried to sue ME!! When I parted company with RTA as an employee they went as far as to sue me for breach of contract and damages (apparently)in their usual decieptful backdoor manner they sued me behind my back, (totally in my abscence and without any knowledge of the hearing) by sending court papers to an address I didnt live at and never had! Then once they obtained the CCJ they wrote to me at my ex wifes address telling me of their success. They are (Paul O'reilly in particular ---- but not withstanding MR Ceri Edwards who's sole job in the company as far as I could see is to attend what seems like almost daily court hearings around the UK in attempts to obtain judgements on the withdrawal fees that reps are told not to disclose at time of writing the contract, and any other funds they can squeeze out of people) without doubt the most ruthless objectionable and devious comany in the business. Try asking how many businesses they have actually sold in the last few years from the 8000 listed? from what I was told by the sales team its equating to far less than 1% and getting worse as they cannot get the businesses finaces as the lenders are valuing the businesses far far lower than the sales reps are told to value them. This company lives on the upfront listing fees, the withdarwal fees and by extracting commisions that are not due by threatening people with court if they dont pay up. Most people do just to avoid the cost of the court action. My advice? DONT PAY!!! I have been (wrongly)accused in ranting letters from Mr O'reilly, (dated some 8+ months after leaving RTA) of contacting their clients and making false claims about the company
I have been threatened with allsorts. Bankruptcy, Libel suits of hundreds of thousands, all in letters to addresses I dont live at. This is their usual tactics. To scare you off. I now live outside the EU so they have no durisdiction here.A precedent has now been set by the courts who have at long last woken up to the fact that RTA has a history of doing this type of thing. I hope its the beginning of the end for them
Post a Comment