misrepresentation act 1967

• Keyword Search
• Contributing Firm Selection All Contributors Abdulaziz Alajlan & Partners - Legal Advisors Abdulaziz Alajlan & Partners – Legal Advisors ACCRALAW ACG International Actecon AdamsonJones Addleshaw Goddard Adsuar Muñiz Goyco Seda & Pérez-Ochoa Adsuar Muñiz Goyco Seda & Perez-Ochoa, P.S.C Adsuar Muñiz Goyco Seda & Pérez-Ochoa, P.S.C. Afridi & Angell AKL Law Firm
 AKL Law Firm Al Busaidy, Mansoor Jamal & Co Al Tamimi & Co Albagli Zaliasnik Allen & Overy LLP Amar Reiter Jeanne Shochatovitch & Co. Amar Reiter Jeanne Shochatovitch & Co Amarchand Mangaldas ANAGNOSTOPOULOS Anagnostopoulos Anderson Mōri & Tomotsune AnJie Anjie Broad AnJie Law Firm Apperio Appleby Arnold & Porter (UK) LLP Arnold & Porter (UK) LLP Ashfords LLP Ashurst Atsumi & Sakai AVM Advogados AZB & Partners Baker & McKenzie Baker & McKenzie Abogados Baker & McKenzie Habib Al Mulla Baker McKenzie Baker McKenzie FenXun Baker McKenzie Habib Al Mulla Bakouchi & Habachi – HB Law Firm LLP Bär & Karrer Bär & Karrer AG
 Bär & Karrer AG Bär & Karrer Basham, Ringe y Correa, S.C. BCL Solicitors LLP Beccar Varela Bentham Europe Limited Berwin Leighton Paisner BGBG Bharucha & Partners Bird & Bird Bivonas Law Black Dog Crisis Management Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP Boekel Bond Dickinson LLP Boodle Hatfield Bougartchev Moyne Associés
 Bradu Neagu & Associates Brodies
 Brodies Bryan Cave BTS & Partners Burges Salmon Byrne Wallace ByrneWallace Calunius Capital LLP Campbells Campos Mello Advogados Canales Capital law Carey Carrasco Firma de Abogados Carter-Ruck CC&B Abogados Charles Russell Speechlys City-Yuwa Partners Clarke Willmott LLP Clasis Law Cleary Gottlieb Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton Clifford Chance Clifford Chance US LLP Clyde & Co Clyde & Co CMS CMS Cameron McKenna Cogence Search Collyer Bristow Comarch Commerce & Finance Law Offices Cooley Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP Cruz Marcelo & Tenefrancia Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas DAC Beachcroft
 DAC Beachcroft Darrois Villey Maillot Brochier De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek De Luca & Partners Deacons Debevoise & Plimpton LLP Dechert Deloitte
 Legal Deloitte Legal Dentons Lee Deriskly Diaz, Reus & Targ Dillon Eustace DLA Piper DLA Piper Luxembourg Drakopoulos Law Druces LLP Edmonds Marshall McMahon Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge LLP Edwards Duthie Solicitors Edwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law Epiq Esin Attorney Partnership Estudio Jurídico Gross Brown Eversheds Agile Eversheds Sutherland EY Law Falcon Chambers Fangda Partners Fasken Martineau LLP fellner wratzfeld partner Ferran Martínez Abogados, S.C Fieldfisher FIVERS - Studio Legale e Tributari Frasers Law Company G. Leontiou LLC Global Law Office Goldfarb Seligman Law Offices GoodCorporation Gordon S. Blair Law Offices Gorriceta Africa Cauton & Saavedra Gowling WLG Graham Thompson Graham Thompson Attorneys GrahamThompson Grant Thornton Greenberg Traurig Greenberg Traurig Grimaldi Studio Legale GSK Stockmann GVZH Advocates Hadef & Partners Hadef & Partners Hadjianastassiou, Ioannides LLC (member of the Deloitte Legal network in Cyprus) Hadjianastassiou, Ioannides LLC | member of the Deloitte Legal network Halimi Law & Tax Han Kun Law Offices Harbour Litigation Funding Haver & Mailänder Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB Haver & Mailänder Hellström Law Herbert Smith Freehills
 Herbert Smith Freehills Higgs and Johnson Hogan Lovells International LLP Holland & Knight Holman Fenwick Willan Homburger Hopscotch Europe LTD Horizon Corporate Advisory Horizons Corporate Advisory Horten Howden Hui Ye Law Firm Ibarra, del Paso y Gallego Ichino Brugnatelli e Associati IndusLaw
 Industry Infralex Ioannis Giannidis Law Firm Irwin Mitchell JA Kemp Jiménez Peña JMiles & Co Jones Day Kammeradvokaten/Poul Schmith Karamanolis & Karamanolis LLC Kemp Little Kennedys Keystone Law Khaitan & Co Khaitan & Co Khaitan & Co LLP King & Spalding King & Spalding King's Business School Kingsley Napley LLP Kirkland & Ellis Kluge Advokatfirma KN Law LLP KPMG Phoomchai Legal Krishnamurthy & Co. (K Law) LALIVE Latham & Watkins Latham & Watkins Laurent Cohen Tanugi Avocats LAVOIX Lavoix Law Firm Andrić o.p. - d.o.o. Lee and Li Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill (LHAG) Legal Advisors - in association with Baker McKenzie Legal Advisors, Abdulaziz Al-Ajlan & Partners in association with Baker & McKenzie Limited Lenz & Staehelin Levitan, Sharon & Co Lewis Silkin Linklaters Locke Lord Loyens & Loeff Loyens & Loeff Loyens & Loeff LPA-CGR avocats LSG LuatViet Macesic & Partners Macfarlanes Machado Associados Maddocks Magrath Global Magrath Sheldrick LLP Makes & Partners Makes & Partners Law Firm Malpica, Iturbe, Buj & Paredes Maltin PR Mannheimer Swartling Maples Group Maravela Asociatii Mareș & Mareș
 Mareș & Mareș Martínez, Algaba, de Haro y Curiel Masotti Cassella Matheson Matheson LLP Mathesons Matouk Bassiouny & Hennawy Mattos Filho Advogados Mayora & Mayora McGuireWoods McKinney, Bancroft & Hughes Melcheds Advogados
 Mendoza Luksic & Valencia Milbank Milberg London Mishcon de Reya MoloLamken MoloLamken LLP Morais Leitão Morgan, Lewis & Bockius Moroğlu Arseven
 Moroğlu Arseven Morrison & Foerster MRP Advisory Muşat & Asociaţii Muşat & Asociaţii Nader, Hayaux y Goebel Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu Niederer Kraft Frey Nodia, Urumashvili & Partners Normative Norton Rose Fulbright Opus 2 Oraro & Company Advocates Ospelt & Partner Attorneys at Law Ltd. OZDAGISTANLI EKICI P.R.I.M.E. Finance Paksoy PARK Wirtschaftsstrafrecht White-collar crime Paul Hastings People + Culture Strategies Philip Lee Pinilla González & Prieto Abogados Pinsent Masons Pinsent Masons Vario PPO Abogados PRAGER DREIFUSS Purdy Smith PwC PwC Legal Quahe Woo & Palmer Rajah & Tann Singapore RASK Attorneys-at-Law Rational Intellectual Property Rivera Gaxiola, Carrasco y Kálloi Robson Harris Rogério Alves 
& Associados
 Rogério Alves & Associados Rokas Rouse RPC Russel McVeagh Russell McVeagh S.U.Khan Associates Corporate & Legal Consultants SABZ Advogados Safelink Sánchez Devanny Schillings Schulte Roth & Zabel Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP Seladore Legal Shakespeare Martineau LLP Shalakany Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. SHC Law & Tax Shearman & Sterling Shearman & Sterling Shepherd and Wedderburn Shin & Kim Shin Associates Shook Lin & Bok Shook, Hardy & Bacon Shoosmiths Signature Litigation Simmons & Simmons Simmons & Simmons Simonsen Vogt Wiig Sirota & Partners SJ Berwin LLP Slaughter and May SLJ Abogados SMPS Legal Sołtysiński Kawecki & Szlęzak Soltysinski Kawecki Szlezak Souza, Mello e Torres Squire Patton Boggs SSEK Legal Consultants Stellar Chambers Stephenson Harwood Steptoe & Johnson Stewarts Stren & Blan Partners Sturzenegger and Co - TheJudge Tanner De Witt Taylor Wessing Technology Law Alliance TGS Baltic The In-House Lawyer The Judge Global Therium Capital Management Thomson Reuters Tilegal TLT Travers Smith Tresorit Trowers & Hamlins Vavrovsky Heine Marth Rechtsanwalte GmbH VK Partners Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz Walder Wyss Ltd Walker Morris Walkers Watson Farley & Williams Weerawong, Chinnavat & Partners Wesslau Söderqvist Advokatbyrå White & Case White & Case LLP Wiggin LLP Wikborg Rein WilmerHale Winston & Strawn Wolf Theiss Wolters Kluwer WongPartnership
 WongPartnership Yerra Solutions Yigal Arnon & Co. Yoon & Yang LLC Zhong Lun Law Firm
 Zhong Lun Law Firm
• Category Selection Features Legal Briefing Profile
• Issue Selection April 2010 April 2011 April 2012 April 2013 April 2014 April 2015 Autumn 2016 Autumn 2017 Autumn 2018 Autumn 2019 Autumn 2020 Autumn 2021 Autumn 2022 Autumn 2023 Dec/Jan 2010 December 2015 December/January 2009 December/January 2010 December/January 2011/2012 December/January 2012 December/January 2013/14 December/January 2014 Doing business in Asia Pacific 2024 Doing business in EMEA 2023 February 2010 February 2011 February 2012 February 2013 February 2014 February 2015 July/August 2010 July/August 2011 July/August 2012 July/August 2013 July/August 2014 July/August 2015 June 2010 June 2011 June 2012 June 2013 June 2014 June 2015 March 2010 March 2012 March 2013 March 2014 March 2015 March 2016 May 2010 May 2011 May 2012 May 2013 May 2014 May 2015 November 2010 November 2011 November 2012 November 2013 November 2014 November 2016 October 2010 October 2011 October 2012 October 2013 October 2014 October 2015 October 2016 September 2010 September 2011 September 2012 September 2013 September 2014 September 2015 Spring 2016 Spring 2017 Spring 2018 Spring 2019 Spring 2020 Spring 2021 Spring 2022 Spring 2023 Spring 2024 Summer 2016 Summer 2017 Summer 2018 Summer 2019 Summer 2021 Summer 2022 Summer 2023 Winter 2016/17 Winter 2017 Winter 2018 Winter 2019 Winter 2020 Winter 2021 Winter 2022 Winter 2023 Winter 2024

| Legal Briefing

The Court of Appeal clarifies the law on remedies for misrepresentation

The remedies available for misrepresentation depend on whether the misrepresentation was fraudulent, negligent or innocent. If a misrepresentation is fraudulent or negligent, the claimant may claim both rescission and damages under s2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 (the Act). If a misrepresentation is negligent or innocent, the court has the discretion to award rescission or damages in lieu of rescission under s2(2) of the Act. In the recent case of Geoffrey Alan Salt v Stratstone Specialist Ltd [2015] the Court of Appeal confirmed that the courts have no discretion to award damages for innocent or negligent misrepresentation under s2(2) where the remedy of rescission is not in fact available.


The judgment also revisited the law on delay as a bar to the equitable remedy of rescission and suggests that the often cited case on delay, Leaf v International Galleries [1950], is no longer good law.

In 2007, Stratstone Specialist Ltd (Stratstone) offered to sell sports car enthusiast Mr Salt a Cadillac described as ‘brand new’. Mr Salt agreed to buy the car for £21,895. However, the vehicle was not brand new. Although the car had never had a registered owner, it had been manufactured and delivered to Stratstone in 2005. It had had various repairs in the course of 2005 and 2006 and been involved in a serious collision.

Numerous defects with the car came to 
Mr Salt’s attention after the sale. Stratstone repaired some of the defects but, in September 2008, Mr Salt sought to return the vehicle and asked for his money back. Stratstone refused to reimburse Mr Salt, who then issued a claim for damages on the basis that the car was not of merchantable quality.

During the course of proceedings, documents were disclosed by Stratstone which revealed that the car was not new and Mr Salt amended his claim to include misrepresentation and a claim for rescission.

JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE

District Judge Hickman held that Mr Salt would not have bought the car without Stratstone’s misrepresentation that it was brand new. He found that damages were the more appropriate remedy in this case. He decided that it would not be possible to order the rescission of the contract because restoration to the original, pre-contractual position was impossible since (i) the car was now registered and could not be returned as an unregistered car and (ii) there had been a considerable lapse of time since the sale and he could not adjust the amount of the price that would be repayable to allow for the vehicle’s depreciation. Hickman DJ therefore held that Mr Salt was confined to a remedy in damages, which he assessed as the £3,000 difference between the car’s value if it had been new at the time of sale (£22,000.00) and its actual value (£19,000), plus £250 for the inconvenience caused by the need to repair the vehicle’s defects. Mr Salt appealed.

On appeal Judge Harris QC reversed the decision of the District Judge. He found that it was possible to restore the parties to their pre-contractual position because: (i) the vehicle still existed; (ii) the fact of registration could not be a bar to rescission; (iii) any difference in the car’s value should be at the risk of the misrepresentor and not the misrepresentee; and (iv) any delay was not so long as to operate as a bar to rescission. For these reasons Harris J ordered rescission and awarded Mr Salt his costs on an indemnity basis. Stratstone appealed.

COURT OF APPEAL

Stratstone appealed on the basis that: (i) Hickman DJ had exercised a discretion under s2(2) of the Act, with which Harris J should not have interfered; (ii) restoration to the original pre-contractual position was impossible; (iii) damages were an adequate remedy; and (iv) delay of nearly four years between the formation of the contract and the seeking of rescission was a bar to relief as it had been in Leaf v International Galleries [1950]. The Court examined each of these grounds for appeal in turn.

Damages under s2(2) of the Act are not available if there is a bar to rescission

Lord Justice Longmore noted that Hickman DJ had not said in terms that he was exercising his discretion to award damages under s2(2) of the Act, but that he seemed to have thought the choice was open to him to award rescission or damages (and that damages were not dependent on the availability of rescission). Longmore LJ, giving the leading judgment, reviewed the conflicting case law as to whether or not, if rescission is not available as a remedy, damages may be awarded. In Alton House Garages (Bromley) Ltd v Monk (1981) and Atlantis Lines and Navigation Co Inc v Hallam Ltd [1983], it was held that if rescission was barred, damages were not available; but in the more recent decision of Thomas Witter Ltd v TTBP Industries Ltd [1996] it was held that the unavailability of rescission would not prevent damages.

Noting that these contradictory precedents were all first instance decisions and the issue remained open for decision by the Court of Appeal, Longmore LJ considered the wording of s2(2) of the Act:

‘If it is claimed… that the contract ought to be or has been rescinded… the court… may declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission’.

He held that these words carried with them the implication that, for damages to be awarded, the remedy of rescission was available. Therefore, if rescission was not available because the contract had been affirmed, third-party rights had intervened, an excessive time had elapsed or restitution had become impossible, damages could not then be said to be awarded ‘in lieu of rescission’.

Restitution was not impossible

Longmore LJ deemed that rescission was the ‘normal remedy’ for misrepresentation and was prima facie available if what was ‘practically just’ could be done. If such practical justice required the misrepresentor to be compensated for depreciation, or that the vehicle’s use be taken into account, that was for the misrepresentor to assert and prove. Longmore LJ found that a vehicle’s registration status (a legal concept) could not be said to change the physical entity of the car and make restitution impossible.

Damages were an insufficient remedy

As rescission should still be the normal remedy for misrepresentation, unless restitution was truly impossible, Longmore LJ held that Mr Salt should be able to recover the £21,895 he paid for the car 
and that damages of £3,250 were insufficient compensation for the wrong 
he had suffered.

Delay was not a bar to rescission

Longmore LJ noted that Leaf v International Galleries , in which delay by the claimant had prevented rescission, had been decided before the Act had been passed. In Leaf , the claimant bought a painting of Salisbury Cathedral innocently misrepresented to be by ‘J Constable’ in 1944. In 1949 the claimant discovered the painting was not by the John Constable and sought to rescind the contract. The court did not permit rescission despite the fact that the claimant had acted promptly on the discovery that the painting was not by Constable.

Longmore LJ held that lapse of time on its own could not be a bar to rescission. Mr Salt had only been aware of the availability of rescission after disclosure had taken place in the first instance proceedings when he discovered the car was not in fact new. It would be unfair for Stratstone to be able 
to rely on the suggestion that, because it was too late to reject the car, it was likewise too late to rescind the contract. 
Mr Justice Roth, in his consenting judgment, emphasised that rescission on the basis of misrepresentation was an equitable remedy and that, in the absence of a statutory bar, an objection to rescission must rest on an equitable basis. It was therefore contradictory to say that rescission may be barred by lapse of time. It was only the lapse of time such that it would be inequitable in all the circumstances to grant rescission which could constitute a bar to the remedy.

While the judgment limits the potential to claim for innocent misrepresentation to those cases where rescission is an available remedy, it still demonstrates that the courts will seek to do practical justice: neither delay nor minor impediments should prevent courts from ordering the rescission of a contract.

Nevertheless, on discovery of a negligent or innocent misrepresentation, potential claimants should ensure that they do not create any bars to rescission through affirmation of the contract, undue delay in bringing the claim or allowing a bona fide third party to acquire rights under the contract that would be prejudiced by rescission.

Defendants seeking to prevent a claim for rescission due to a claimant’s delay in bringing the claim must establish that granting rescission after the delay would lead to an inequitable outcome.

By Chimé Metok Dorjee, associate, 
Cooley (UK) LLP.

Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Journals
• > The Cambridge Law Journal
• > Volume 25 Issue 2
• > Misrepresentation and the Act of 1967*

Article contents

Misrepresentation and the act of 1967 *.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

The law concerning misrepresentations inducing contracts has been the subject of criticism for some years, and in 1959, the then Lord Chancellor, Viscount Kilmuir, referred the matter to the Law Reform Committee. Their Report, published in 1962, had a mixed reception. A learned commentator, writing in this journal, gave it a rather chilly welcome, on the ground that it went too far; on the other hand, Mr. Diamond, writing in the pages of Law Reform Now , complained that the Report did not go far enough, and suggested that the subtle distinction between a mere representation and a term of the contract should be abolished. In 1967 the Misrepresentation Act was passed, to give effect, with certain modifications, to such of the recommendations of the Law Reform Committee as had not yet been implemented.

Access options

1 Cmnd. 1782.

2 [1963] C.L.J. 7.

3 At p. 66.

4 s. 16 (1) of the Hire-Purchase Act 1965 provides that a dealer who negotiates a hire-purchase agreement between a customer and a finance company is to be regarded as the agent of the company for the purpose of any representation made by him as to the quality of the goods, thus giving effect to one of the Committee's recommendations (para. 20).

5 Ex p. Briggs (1866) L.R. 1 Eq. 483.

6 Clarke v. Dickson (1858) E.B. & E. 148.

7 White v. Garden (1851) 10 C.B. 919.

8 Pennsylvania Shipping Co. v. Cie. Nationale de Navigation ( 1936 ) 155 L.T. 294 Google Scholar ; [1936] 2 All E.R. 1167. Aliter Cie. Francaise des Chemins de Fer Paris-Orléans v. Leeston Shipping Co. ( 1919 ) 1 Ll.L.R. 235 Google Scholar .

9 Per Denning L.J. in Leaf v. International Galleries [ 1950 ] 2 K.B. 86 at pp. 90 – 91 Google Scholar .

10 Under s. 11 (1) ( c ) of the Sale of Goods Act 1893.

11 (1848) 1 H.L.Cas. 605.

12 Ibid ., p. 633.

13 [1905] 1 Ch. 326.

14 So Cheshire & Fifoot, Law of Contract , 6th ed., at p. 251.

15 Per Joyce J. at p. 334.

16 Angel v. Jay [ 1911 ] 1 K.B. 666 Google Scholar ; Edler v. Auerbach [ 1950 ] 1 K.B. 359 Google Scholar .

17 e.g. , by Scrutton , L.J. in Lever Bros. Ltd. v. Bell [ 1931 ] 1 K.B. 577 at p. 588 Google Scholar , and especially by Denning , L.J. in Solle v. Butcher [ 1950 ] 1 K.B. 671 at p. 695 Google Scholar , and in Leaf v. International Galleries [ 1950 ] 2 K.B. 86 at p. 90 Google Scholar . See also the classic article by Dr. Hammelmann at 55 L.Q.R. 90.

18 Mackenzie v. Royal Bank of Canada [ 1934 ] A.C. 468 Google Scholar .

19 e.g. , by Lord Evershed M.R. in Leaf v. International Galleries ( supra ) at p. 95 and by the P.C. in Senanayake v. Cheng [ 1965 ] 3 W.L.R. 715 Google Scholar .

20 Lords Denning and Wilberforce; contra Lord Upjohn.

21 s. 2 (2).

22 [1936] 2 All E.R. 1167.

23 Ibid , at p. 1171.

24 Compagnie Francaise des Chemins de Fer Paris-Orléans v. Leeston Shipping Co. ( 1919 ) 1 Ll.L.R. 235 Google Scholar .

25 Under s. 2 (2).

26 [1950] 2 K.B. 86.

27 Ibid , at p. 90.

28 Infra , p. 249.

29 Derry v. Peek (1884) 14 App.Cas. 337.

30 [1964] A.C. 465.

31 Treitel, The Law of Contract , 2nd ed., pp. 228, 261; Stevens, 27 M.L.R. 121, 156; Cheshire & Fifoot ( dubitante ), Law of Contract , p. 238. The courts have had chances to decide this question, but have not taken them— e.g. , Wells v. Buckland [ 1965 ] 2 Q.B. 170 Google Scholar ; Dick Bentley Productions Ltd. v. Harold Smith ( Motors ) Ltd. [ 1965 ] 1 W.L.R. 623 Google Scholar .

32 Heilbut Symonds & Co. v. Buckleton [ 1913 ] A.C. 30 Google Scholar .

33 Whittington v. Seale-Hayne ( 1900 ) 16 T.L.R. 181 Google Scholar .

35 s. 2 (1), supra .

36 Burrows v. Rhodes [1899] 1 Q.B. 816.

36a Supra , p. 241.

37 Within s. 2 (1).

38 L'Estrange v. Graucob Ltd. [ 1934 ] 2 K.B. 394 Google Scholar .

39 Suisse Atlantique Société D'Armement Maritime S.A. v. N.V. Rotterdamsche Kolen Centrale [ 1966 ] 2 All E.R. 61 Google Scholar .

40 e.g. , Road Traffic Act 1960, s. 151; Hire Purchase Act 1965, s. 18 (3).

41 Boyd & Forrest v. Glasgow & S.W. Railway , 1915 S.C.(H.L.) 21 Google Scholar .

42 Lord Gardiner mentioned in Committee that the Law Commission (who are undertaking a general review of the law relating to exemption clauses) regarded this clause as in line with their general thinking.

43 [1923] 2 K.B. 490.

44 Atiyah, The Sale of Goods , 3rd ed., 220–222.

45 Varley v. Whipp [ 1900 ] 1 Q.B. 513 Google Scholar .

46 So Atiyah, op. cit. , in his 1st edition, though he has since recanted. Cf. Fridman, Sale of Goods , p. 71.

No CrossRef data available.

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

• Volume 25, Issue 2
• P. B. Fairest
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197300087778

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Reply to: Submit a response

- No HTML tags allowed - Web page URLs will display as text only - Lines and paragraphs break automatically - Attachments, images or tables are not permitted

Your details

Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests.

Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.

Misrepresentation

Subjects | law notes | contract law, subscribe on youtube.

I help people navigate their law degrees

🎓 Simple and digestible information on studying law effectively.

🎬 One new video every week (I accept requests and reply to everything!)

📚 FREE courses, content, and other exciting giveaways.

Introduction

⇒ Misrepresentation is complex:

• It mixes common law, statutes and equity
• It is a different action from breach of contract BUT the same facts may give rise to liability for both
• Closely related to mistake BUT there is a distinct legal responses

⇒ For there to be actionable misrepresentation:

• There must have been an unambiguous false statement
• The false statement must have been of law or fact
• The false statement must lead the other party to enter the contract

⇒ So there must have been a false representation (i.e. a misrepresentation): Behn v Burness (1863) states that ‘a representation is a statement, or assertion, made by one party to the other, before or at the time of the contract, of some matter or circumstance relating to it’

• An objective assessment is taken in distinguishing between a representation and a fact (i.e. in distinguishing between there being a misrepresentation or a breach of contract)/
• BUT, s 1(a) Misrepresentation Act 1967 makes it clear that the distinction between a representation and a term does not really matter anymore: even if a misrepresentation becomes a term in the contract, the right to claim misrepresentation is not lost

1) There must have been an unambiguous false Statement

⇒ For there to be a misrepresentation one party must have made an unambiguous false statement to the other party

⇒ If the false statement is made by a third party this will not affect the contract

• However, see the exception to this in Barclays Bank v O’Brien [1994] where the contract was not enforceable based on the misrepresentation of a 3rd party (the husband)

⇒ The statement MUST be unambiguous

• The case of McInerny v Lloyd’s Bank Ltd [1974] showed that ambiguous statements are not actionable

2) Statement of existing fact or law

⇒ Only statements of past or present : Mellish LJ in Beattie v Lord Ebury (1872) said that a statement that ‘something will be done in the future cannot either be true or false at the time it is made’

⇒ Must be a statement of fact or law, not an opinion : see, for example, Bisset v Wilkinson [1927]

⇒ It can be a statement of fact and law: Pankhania v Hackney LBC [at 57]

⇒ There are some exceptions to the general rule that a statement of opinion is not actionable (i.e. where opinion can be regarded as fact):

• a) Where the opinion given by X contradicts the true facts he (X) already knows (so X knows his opinion he is giving is not true) e.g. Smith v Land and House Property Corp (1884)
• b) Expert opinion can be treated as statement of fact e.g. Esso Petroleum Co ltd v Mardon [1976]
• c) An opinion which is not usually had can be treated as a false statement of fact e.g. Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885)

⇒ Misrepresentations can also be made by actions and/or conduct:

• Walters v Morgan (1861) Campbell LJ: ‘a nod or a wink, or a shake of the head, or a smile… which might influence the price of the subject to be sold’ can amount to misrepresentation
• Also see the case of Gordon v Selico Ltd (1986) , where there was misrepresentation by the act of painting

⇒ In general, you cannot have misrepresentation by silence (Keates v The Earl of Cadogan (1851)). However, there may be exceptions to this general rule:

• a) Only half the facts are given e.g. Dimmock v Hallett (1866)
• b) A true statement made originally, but when circumstances change and these changes are not disclosed to the other party e.g. With v O’Flanagan (1936)
• c) Where there is good faith and the parties must disclose all relevant facts (contracts uberrimae fidei) e.g. in Insurance contracts

3) The misrepresentation must lead the other party to enter the contract

⇒ 1) The representation must have been material to the decision to enter into the contract

⇒ 2) The representation must have actually been relied upon by the representee

⇒ If the party would have entered into the contract anyway (without the false statement of fact or law) then there is no misrepresentation: JEB Fasteners Ltd v Bloom [1983]. However:

• Although misrepresentation must lead other party to enter the contract it need not be only reason the other party did so
• It does not matter if the party that is being misrepresented missed an opportunity to discover the truth

Remedies for misrepresentation

Three remedies for misrepresentation.

⇒ Rescision for misrepresentation

⇒ Damages

⇒ Damages under section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967

⇒ This used to be the main remedy for misrepresentation, however over the years compensation has become a much wider used remedy, but rescission is still widely available

⇒ Rescission means to put the contract aside and put the parties in the position they were originally in

⇒ When does rescission become unavailable?

• Affirmation i.e. where the parties continues with a contract even after they know/discover the statement was false e.g. Long v Lloyd [1958]
• Lapse of time i.e. a party may not be able to rescind the contract if too much time has gone by since the misrepresentation was made e.g. Leaf v International Galleries [1950]
• Impossibility of restitution i.e. rescission only possible if ‘he can return what he has received’. So where a good had been consumer or destroyed restitution is impossible e.g. Clarke v Dickson (1858)
• Adverse effect on third parties i.e. if goods are obtained by misrepresentation, which are then sold on to a third party, the court will not expect the third party to give the goods back e.g. Phillips v Brooks [1919]

⇒ Misrepresentation does not automatically enable rescission → the contract becomes voidable not void

• The innocent party decides if they wish to rescind the contract, if not then the contract remains enforceable
• The innocent party must notify that they wish the contract to be rescinded e.g. Reese Silver Mining v Smith (1869)
• What if the other party cannot be notified (e.g. if lost contact)? Car and Universal Finance v Caldwell [1965] shows that in such a situation you do not necessarily have to contact the other party directly (the claimant contacted the police and the Automobile Association)

Damages at common law

⇒ In common law, damages were once only given for fraudulent misrepresentation (tort of deceit). The main case on deceit is Derry v Peek (1889)

⇒ NOW, negligent misstatements (tort of negligence) can now give rise to damages being allocated (Hedley Byrne v Heller and partners [1964])

⇒ Damages are awarded by determining what position the parties would have been in if the false representation had not been made

• This does not necessarily involve placing the parties into the parties’ original position before the misrepresentation, but may also take account of missed beneficial opportunities as a result of the misrepresentation e.g. Doyle v Olby [1969]
• So all actual losses the claimant suffers, even if NOT foreseeable (i.e. remoteness of damages rule does not apply), the defendant will be liable for!

The Art of Getting a First in Law - ONLY £4.99

FOOL-PROOF methods of obtaining top grades

SECRETS your professors won't tell you and your peers don't know

INSIDER TIPS and tricks so you can spend less time studying and land the perfect job

We work really hard to provide you with incredible law notes for free...

The proceeds of this eBook helps us to run the site and keep the service FREE!

Types of misrepresentation

⇒ Fraudulent misrepresentation (tort of deceit)

⇒ Negligent Misrepresentation

⇒ Innocent misrepresentation

Fraudulent Misrepresentation

⇒ Behn v Burness (1863) defines fraudulent misrepresentation as follows: “either by reason of its being made with a knowledge of its untruth, or by reason of its being made dishonestly, with a reckless ignorance whether it was true or untrue.”

⇒ In Derry v Peek (1889), Lord Herschell further refined the definition of fraudulent misrepresentation into 3 important factors: ‘a false representation made knowingly, or without belief in its truth, or recklessly, without caring whether it be true or false”.

Negligent Misrepresentation (under statute)

⇒ Negligent misrepresentation is a false statement made without reasonable ground for belief in its truth. This differs from common law negligent misstatement (see below)

⇒ Negligent misrepresentation is enacted by Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2(1)

⇒ It seems odd to call it negligent misrepresentation because the claimant is never proving the defendant's negligence

⇒ The burden of proof on representor (i.e. the person making the representation) to establish honest belief that their statement was made reasonably

⇒ See the case of Howard Marine v Ogden (1978)

Innocent Misrepresentation

⇒ This category is almost redundant

⇒ Prior to 1967, any misrepresentat that wasn't fraudulent would be deemed as Innocent misrepresentation, but this has now changed and innocent misrepresentation has been considerably reduced

⇒ Innocent misrepresentation is now defined as a situation where the misrepresentor had a reasonable belief his misstatement was true

Negligent Misstatement (common law)

⇒ A negligent misstatement is a claim which is brought at common law in tort

• See the case of Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964)

⇒ Negligent misstatement is similar to negligent misrepresentation but there needs to be a ‘duty of care’ between the parties to rely on negligent misstatement

• BUT, occasionally there only needs to be proof that the other party would rely on the false statement (Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978])

⇒ The current position on when you can claim negligent misstatement is as follows: the harm must be foreseeable and the parties must have ‘sufficient proximity’ (introduced in Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990])

⇒ However, negligent misstatement has not been used as much since the Misrepresentation Act 1967 because a remedy for non-fraudulent misrepresentation can be made under the act

Indemnity at common law

⇒ In common law you could claim indemnity for any expenses instead of rescinding the contract e.g. Whittington v Seale-Hayne (1900)

⇒ Today, indemnity is only really sought where the contract is being rescinded by no intentional fault of the misrepresentor

Damages under s 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967

⇒ s2(1) Misrepresentation act says that the same remedies are available for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation

⇒ Once it is proved there was a false statement the burden of proof is on the defendant to show that he/she had reasonable grounds to believe what they said was true (reverse burden of proof) – if the defenant is unable to do so then damages will be awarded for negligent misrepresentation even though the claimant only has a very low burden of proof, who must only show there is an actionable misrepresentation (this is sometimes known as “fiction of fraud”)

Measure of damages under s. 2(1)

⇒ The question is whether damages should be contractual or tortious

• Contractual damages would seek to compensate the innocent party
• Tortious damages would seek to put the claimant into the position he/she would have been in had the misrepresentation not been made
• Watts v Spence [1976] made it appear it was contractual, but the Court of Appeal in Sharneyford v Edge [1987] said it should be tortious
• Royscot Trust v Rogerson (1991) also considered this issue. The court held that the Misrepresentation Act said damages are to be tortious, not contractual

Damages under S. 2(2) of the misrepresentation Act

⇒ This allows court to award damages in lieu (instead) of rescission in non-fraudulent misrepresentation cases

• It was therefore seen by some people that damages was a remedy lost if the right to rescission was also lost e.g. through lapse of time, affirmation, impossibility and third party rights (p94)
• Thomas Witter v TBP Industries [1996] did not accept this view - said damages can still be awarded even if the availability of rescission has been lost
• Floods of Queensferry v Shand Construction [2000] and Government of Zanzibar v British Aerospace [2000] did not follow the view in Thomas Witter

⇒ William Sindall v Cambridgeshire County Council [1994] said obiter that the amount of damages awarded under s2(2) should be less than under s1(1)

Exclusion of liability for misrepresentation

⇒ The general rule, under s. 3 of Misrepresentation Act 1967 (amended by S. 8 of UCTA 1977), says that you cannot exclude any liability for misrepresentation

⇒ When is it possible to exclude liability for misrepresentation?

• When there is an exclusion clauses that is reasonable
• Where there is no representation or no reliance clauses, if it is reasonable: Springwell Navigation Corporation v JP Morgan
• Where there is an entire-agreement clause, if reasonable

Law Application Masterclass - ONLY £9.99

Learn how to effortlessly land vacation schemes, training contracts, and pupillages by making your law applications awesome. This eBook is constructed by lawyers and recruiters from the world's leading law firms and barristers' chambers.

✅ 60+ page eBook

✅ Research Methods, Success Secrets, Tips, Tricks, and more!

✅ Help keep Digestible Notes FREE

Digestible Notes was created with a simple objective: to make learning simple and accessible. We believe that human potential is limitless if you're willing to put in the work.

© 2024 Digestible Notes All Rights Reserved.

Our Socials

IPSA LOQUITUR

Contract: Misrepresentation

Misrepresentation, establishing misrepresentation, the importance of misrepresentation.

If a statement is a term of the contract , the innocent party can sue for breach if it is untrue. However, in many cases a statement which induced the contract will not be part of the contract itself. This means that no action for breach of contract will arise. In those circumstances, the innocent party may find a remedy by relying on misrepresentation as a defence or action.

The Requirements

To establish misrepresentation, the innocent party must establish that:

• The other party made a false statement of fact or law;
• The statement induced the innocent party to enter into the contract.

False Statement

The false statement must be one of law or fact, and not a statement of opinion: Bisset v Wilkinson [1927] AC 177. There is an exception to this where:

• The statement is one of opinion based on false facts which the representor was in a position to know: Smith v Land & House Property Corp (1884) 28 Ch D 7; or
• The statement was one of future intent which the representor had no intention to carry out: Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch D 459.

Conduct which conveys information can amount to a statement of fact or law: Spice Girls v Aprilia [2000] EWHC Ch 140. Silence cannot normally be an actionable misrepresentation: Smith v Hughes (1871) LR 6 QB 597. This is so unless the contract is one of ‘utmost faith’ (e.g. insurance contracts): HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd v Chase Manhattan Bank [2003] UKHL 6.

If a statement of fact or law was true at the time it was made but later becomes false, it will be a misrepresentation not to correct it: With v O’Flanagan   [1936] Ch 575. However, there is no duty to disclose relevant information in the absence of a misleading representation: Turner v Green [1895] 2 Ch 205.

The innocent party must show that they knew about and relied on the representation when deciding to enter into the contract: Horsfall v Thomas [1862] 1 H&C 90. This means that but for the representation, the innocent party must show he would not have entered into the contract had he known the truth.

The courts will presume, in the absence of contrary evidence, that the innocent party relied on the statement if it was ‘material’. A statement is material if a reasonable person would have relied on it: Museprime Properties Ltd v Adhill Properties Ltd (1991) 61 P & CR 111.

However, in fraudulent misrepresentation cases, the innocent party only needs to prove that the representation was actively in their mind when they made the decision – a lower threshold. The court will also presume that a fraudulent misrepresentation induced the contract if the representor intended it to induce a contract: BV Nederlandse Industrie Van Eiprodukten v Rembrandt Entreprises [2019] EWCA Civ 596.

Reliance will not exist if the innocent party made checks to verify the statement himself: Attwood v Small [1838] UKHL J60. However, the fact that the innocent party could have verified the statement but failed to does not mean he did not rely it: Redgrave v Hurd (1881) 20 Ch D 1.

Remedies for Misrepresentation

Effect of misrepresentation.

If the innocent party establishes misrepresentation, the contract becomes voidable at their election.

A contract which is voidable is not treated as never existing. Rather, it is treated as existing until the innocent party communicates that they are terminating the contract or take reasonable steps to do so. Reasonable steps include reporting the goods stolen if the defendant has vanished.

Types of Misrepresentation

The exact range of remedies which are available for misrepresentation depends on whether it was fraudulent, negligent or innocent.

Fraudulent Misrepresentation

A fraudulent misrepresentation is one which the representor knows is false, does not believe is true or which the representor is reckless as to its truth or falsity: Derry v Peek (1889) 5 TLR 625.

The remedy for fraudulent misrepresentation is to rescind the contract and claim damages under the tort of deceit. These damages do not need to be foreseeable: Doyle v Olby [1969] 2 QB 158.

Negligent Misrepresentation

A negligent misrepresentation is one which the representor cannot prove he had reasonable grounds to believe was true: Howard Marine v Ogden [1978] QB 574.

As a result of section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967, the remedy for a negligent misrepresentation is the same as the remedy available for a fraudulent misrepresentation: Royscott Trust v Rogerson [1991] 2 QB 297. Alternatively, the court may refuse an application for rescission and grant damages ( assessed according to contractual principles ) in lieu , if it thinks this is equitable in light of the potential harm rescinding/not rescinding would cause to each party: Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2(2).

Innocent Misrepresentation

An innocent misrepresentation is one which is neither fraudulent or negligent.

The remedy for innocent misrepresentation is rescission . Alternatively, the court may refuse an application for rescission and grant damages ( assessed according to contractual principles ) in lieu , if it thinks this is equitable in light of the potential harm rescinding/not rescinding would cause to each party: Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2(2).

Because misrepresentation renders the contract voidable rather than void, the right to rescind may be lost . The court is also likely to refuse rescission and grant damages in lieu under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2 where:

• The innocent party’s real reason for seeking rescission is to escape a bad bargain unrelated to the misrepresentation: William Sindall plc v Cambridgeshire County Council [1993] EWCA Civ 14;
• The misrepresentation has not caused the innocent party any loss.

Contract Defences Quiz

Test yourself on the principles governing when a party to a contract has a defence.

Richard offers to sell Michael a book. Richard knows that Michael believes that the book is signed by the author. Richard did nothing to make him believe this, but nor does he correct Michael. Michael relies on his belief that the book is signed when deciding to buy it. Can Michael rely on the defence of misrepresentation?

Incorrect . There is no duty to disclose relevant information in the absence of a false representation by the other party: Turner v Green [1895] 2 Ch 205. Richard did nothing to make Michael believe the book is signed, so he has no duty to correct him.

What are the two requirements of the defence of misrepresentation?

When establishing the defence of undue influence, how does the claimant demonstrate 'Type 2B' presumed influence?

Incorrect .

Complete this sentence: The defence of mistake renders the contract...

ABC Bank is advancing money to a debtor. An individual tells the bank that they wish to act as a guarantor or surety for that debt. The debtor has unduly influenced this individual. When is the bank taken to have constructive notice of the presence of undue influence in the transaction?

Incorrect . A bank is taken to be on notice if they are aware that the surety and the debtor have a non-commercial relationship, unless the money is being advanced to both of them: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2).

Joanie has established a presumption that her lawyer, Richard, influenced her when she sold her house to him. To establish undue influence, what does she need to do to show that the influence was undue?

Incorrect . If the claimant relied on one of the presumptions they only need to prove that the transaction 'calls for explanation' because it is not obviously an act of independent judgement or a normal incident of the parties' relationship: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) . If they show this, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that the influence was not undue.

When establishing that the defendant's influence was undue for the purposes of the defence of undue influence, the claimant must show that the transaction was manifestly to their disadvantage. True or false?

Incorrect . This requirement was abolished in Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2).

Katie and Andrew enter into a contract which states that Andrew will deliver Thompson apples to Katie. The parties are not aware that there are actually two kinds of Thompson apples - Virginia Thompson apples and Alabama Thompson apples. The two types of apple taste very different and have very different uses. Andrew intends to ship Virginia Thompson apples, while Katie is expecting to receive Alabama Thompson apples. Is the contract void for mutual mistake?

Incorrect . The law is normally concerned only with what the contract objectively appears to mean, so it does not matter that the parties were subjectively mistaken as to each other's intentions. The court will look at what a reasonable person would take the parties to have agreed to, and that will be the contract. However, if a reasonable person would see the contract as completely ambiguous, the contract is void for mutual mistake: Raffles v Wichelhaus.

Celestine is an elderly woman whose eye-sight is failing. Her niece, Laura, persuades her to sign a document claiming that it will authorise Laura to remove £50 for Celestine's bank account to enable her to pay Celestine's bills. In reality, it is a contract transferring Celestine's house to Laura. Celestine did not bother to read it as she trusts Laura (who has helped her out with bills before) and her eyesight makes reading very difficult. Can Celestine rely on the defence of non es factum ?

Incorrect . Non es factum applies if the claimant can show that they were reasonably mistaken as to the fundamental nature of the document they were signing: Foster v Mackinnon (1869) LR 4 CP 704 . The mistake must be reasonable, meaning the claimant must not have been negligent. In this case Celestine thought she was signing a bank transfer, when really she was signing a document transferring her house. She might be deemed negligent for not reading it, but she had reasonably good reasons not to, so it is possible that she can rely on the defence of non es factum .

Complete this sentence: The defence of illegality renders the contract...

Can a person rely on any of the three categories of presumed influence when trying to establish undue influence to challenge the will of a deceased person?

Incorrect . Only actual undue influence may be proved: Nutt v Nutt .

For the purposes of unilateral mistake, when is a term 'vital' to the contract?

Incorrect . A vital term is a term which is objectively central to the contract, such as (but not limited to) the price of the goods: Hartog v Colin & Shields.

Complete this sentence: The defence of undue influence renders the contract...

Can the innocent party prove that a misrepresentation caused them to enter the contract if they had the opportunity to verify the statement, but did not?

Incorrect . See Redgrave v Hurd.

Does the claimant need to establish that but for the threat, they would not have entered into the contract if they are trying to prove duress to the person?

Incorrect . See Barton v Armstrong.

When will the defence of illegality bar a claim?

Incorrect . See Patel v Mirza.

Maisy enters into a contract over the phone with a man falsely claiming to be her estranged cousin, John. Maisy later seeks to argue that she should not be bound by the contract, because she would not have entered into the contract had she known the man was not John. Is the man's identity a vital term of the contract?

Incorrect . If the parties are not contracting face-to-face, such as by telephone or internet, the defendant's identity is only a core term of the contract if the claimant intended to contract with an identified, real person who the defendant was pretending to be: Cundy v Lindsey.

Hannah is applying for a loan for the family business. Her girlfriend Celestine tells the bank that she will act as surety for the loan. The money is to be advanced to a company which Hannah and Celestine hold joint shares in. The bank is aware that Celestine is Hannah's girlfriend and that she has shares in the company, but they are not aware that Hannah has unduly influenced Celestine. They grant the loan. Can Celestine rely on the defence of undue influence against the bank?

Incorrect . Constructive notice arises when the bank knows there is a non-commercial relationship between the debtor and surety. While this does not apply if the money is being advanced to both, banks are not entitled to assume that a person is benefiting from money advanced to a business they have shares in, because they might have no real role in the business: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2).

Can silence be an actionable misrepresentation?

Julie is applying for an overdraft on a joint account controlled by herself and her husband Johan at ABC Bank. Her husband Johan offers to act as surety. The bank is unaware of the fact that Johan has been unduly influenced by Julie, but knows that the two are married. The overdraft is granted. Does the bank have constructive notice of the undue influence?

Incorrect . A bank is taken to be on notice if they are aware that the surety and the debtor have a non-commercial relationship, unless the money is being advanced to both of them: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2). In this case the money was advanced to both parties since it was an overdraft on an account controlled by both.

David offers to sell Mary a house, representing that it has a conservatory. Mary relies on this representation when deciding to buy the house. Prior to the sale, there is a fire, and the conservatory burns down. David does not tell Mary. Can Mary rely on the defence of misrepresentation?

Incorrect . If a statement of fact or law was true at the time it was made but later becomes false, it will be a misrepresentation not to correct it: With v O'Flanagan.

In which two scenarios can a person rely on the defence of undue influence against a third-party?

Complete this sentence: The defence of economic duress renders the contract...

For the purposes of the defence of economic duress, can a lawful threat be illegitimate?

Incorrect . See DSND Subsea Ltd v Petroleum Geo Services ASA .

In which of the three following circumstances would the defence of common mistake apply?

When determining if the defence of misrepresentation applies, the courts will presume, in the absence of contrary evidence, that the claimant relied on the statement if a reasonable person would have relied on it. True or false?

Incorrect . See Museprime Properties Ltd v Adhill Properties Ltd.

When establishing the defence of undue influence, how does the claimant demonstrate 'Type 2A' presumed influence?

Xavier is a busy taxi driver who purchases a new car from Dodgy Dealers Inc. He signs their standard term car-purchase contract without reading it, not realising that it contains an onerous clause requiring him to pay a penalty fee if he gets the car serviced by anyone else within the first year. Can Xavier rely on the defence of non es factum to get out of the contract?

Incorrect . Non es factum only applies if the claimant can show that he was reasonably mistaken as to the fundamental nature of the document he was signing: Foster v Mackinnon. Xavier knew what kind of document he was signing, so it is irrelevant that he did not know the specific terms.

If a contract is void ab initio , can either party rely on its terms?

Incorrect . Void ab initio contracts are automatically treated as having never existed.

Joanie has established that a neighbour of hers, Richard, pressured her into selling her house to him. To establish undue influence, what does she need to do to show that the influence was undue?

Incorrect . Joanie has shown actual influence, so she must also demonstrate that the Richard acted unduly.

Maisy enters into a contract over the phone with a man falsely claiming to be her long-lost cousin, John. In reality, Maisy does not have a long-lost cousin named John. Maisy later seeks to argue that she should not be bound by the contract, because she would not have entered into the contract had she known the man was not her cousin. Is the man's identity a vital term of the contract?

Incorrect . If the parties are not contracting face-to-face, such as by telephone or internet, and the defendant creates an entirely fake identity, the the claimant is taken to be solely concerned with their attributes and mistake will not be available: Kings Norton Metal v Edridge, Merrett.

Maisy enters into a contract with a man falsely claiming to be her long-lost cousin, John, while they are catching up at a restaurant. Maisy later seeks to argue that she should not be bound by the contract, because she would not have entered into the contract had she known the man was not John. Is the man's identity a vital term of the contract?

Incorrect . If the parties are contracting face to face, there is a presumption that each intends to contract with the person in front of them: Phillips v Brooks . This can be rebutted by showing that the claimant would only have transacted with a particular individual: Ingram v Little. Maisy could establish a mistake as to a vital term if she can show that she would not have made that contract with anyone but her real cousin.

When establishing the defence of undue influence, how does the claimant demonstrate actual influence?

Marcus has shown that he reposed a large amount of trust in his partner, Adrian, when it comes to financial affairs. He also shows that his decision to transfer his inheritance to Adrian is a transaction which calls for explanation. To avoid the transfer being affected by the defence of undue influence, what must Adrian do to show that the influence was not undue?

Incorrect . To show that the influence was not undue, the defendant must show that the claimant was able to make an independent, fully-informed and voluntary decision to enter into the contract: Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) . It is not enough to show that the claimant would have consented to the contract even if they were free from influence: UCB Corporate Services Ltd v Williams.

For the purposes of the defence of unilateral mistake, when can a term as to the quality of the goods be considered 'vital'?

Incorrect . Secondary terms, such as those relating to the quality of the goods, are not vital: Shogun Finance v Hudson.

When are damages in deceit available for a misrepresentation?

David induces Mary to enter into a contract to buy a car by promising that he will service the car before he gives it to her. He has no intention of doing so. Is this an actionable misrepresentation?

Incorrect . A statement of future intent can be an actionable statement so long as the maker of the statement had no intention of carrying it out: Edgington v Fitzmaurice.

When establishing the defence of undue influence, how does the claimant demonstrate the category of presumed influence established in Malik (Deceased) v Shiekh ?

When are damages available for innocent misrepresentation?

Incorrect . See the Misrepresentation Act 1967 , s 2(2).

What two conditions must be met before a transaction is void for unilateral mistake?

Can undue influence be demonstrated in cases where the parties had no relationship prior to the transaction?

Incorrect . See Moursi v Doherty.

Can the innocent party prove that a misrepresentation caused them to enter the contract if they used their own resources to verify whether the statement was true?

Incorrect . See Attwood v Small.

If a contract is voidable, can either party rely on its terms?

Incorrect . Voidable contracts are treated as having never existed only once the innocent party rejects the contract. If the contract is affirmed, both parties can rely on it.

What must a third-party bank do to rid themselves of constructive notice of undue influence?

Incorrect . The bank must ask the surety who their legal adviser is, and provide them with sufficient information about the transaction to enable them to give competent advice. They may not proceed with the transaction until they have received a written confirmation from that adviser stating that the surety has been advised and understood the advice.

What three elements must an innocent party show to establish the defence of economic duress?

Complete this sentence: The defence of misrepresentation renders the contract...

Complete this sentence: The defence of duress to the person renders the contract...

In what two scenarios are the courts likely to refuse to rescind a contract which has been rendered voidable by misrepresentation?

Maisy enters into a contract with a man falsely claiming to be her long-lost cousin, John, while they are catching up at a restaurant. The contract is in writing and signed, and the man signed his name as 'John'. Maisy later seeks to argue that she should not be bound by the contract, because she would not have entered into the contract had she known the man was not John. Can Maisy rely on the defence of mistake in relation to the man's identity?

Incorrect . The parol evidence rule means that if the written contract identifies the parties by name, then the claimant is taken to have contracted with that named individual and the defendant cannot admit evidence that the named individual is really them: Shogun Finance v Hudson.

Does a defence of duress to property exist?

Incorrect . The historical rule was that it did not exist, but this may no longer be the case after the development of the defence of economic duress.

For the purposes of the defence of duress, what factors are relevant to whether the innocent party has a practical choice? (Three answers)

When dealing with the defence of undue influence in a case where a presumption of influence has been raised, can the defendant rebut the presumption?

Incorrect . Different judges in Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2)  took different approaches to the issue, and there has been no case settling the matter.

Your score is

Share this:

Misrepresentation: Pre and Post 1967

The Pros and Cons of Studying Law at A-level

Secret Trials: A More Balanced View

The Changes Brought by the Misrepresentation Act 1967

Before discussing the changes brought by the Misrepresentation Act 1967, it is necessary to understand common law misrepresentation.

A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact or law which induces the other party to enter into a contract. Under common law, misrepresentation can be divided into three types: fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation and innocent misrepresentation. Under fraudulent misrepresentation representee is required to prove a fraudulent state of mind of the representor. Under Derry v Peek as per Lord Herschell, there are two ways which can be used to prove fraud. Either to show that the representor had knowingly made a statement without believing in its truth or that he/she was reckless as to whether the statement made by him/her was true or false. However, for the representee to prove a fraudulent state of mind on the part of the representor is extremely difficult and in some cases almost impossible, in particular because the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt.

Upon establishing one of the requirements, two remedies may be available for the defendant to choose: rescission and damages. In discussing the damages awarded under fraudulent misrepresentation, one case worth mentioning here is the East v Maurer case.  In this case Beldam LJ was of the opinion that it is not that loss of profit is not recoverable under tort of deceit, but it is simply that in previous cases such as Toteff v Antonas (an Australia decision) and Doyle v Olby, the judges did not have the benefit of considering whether loss of profit is recoverable.  Thus, he was of the opinion that the cases mentioned above did not imply that loss of profit is not recoverable. He stated that loss of profit is recoverable under the definition of damages for tort of deceit given by Lord Atkin in Clark v Urquhart – actual damage directly flowing from the fraudulent inducement. The actual damages here are the opportunity cost suffered by the claimant – the profit that he would have earned by running a similar business in a similar area. This case has changed the quantification of damages under fraudulent misrepresentation from the previous reliance measure (out of pocket rule) to include loss of profit. Therefore, now since under fraudulent misrepresentation loss of profit can be claimed, claimants will usually try to make a claim under fraudulent misrepresentation if possible.

Upon failure to prove fraud a claimant can still bring an action under negligent misrepresentation. This requires, an existence of a fiduciary or special relationship between the parties:  a duty of care (Hedley Berne v Heller). The representor must have breached that duty of care and the representee must have suffered a loss. Upon satisfying these requirements the remedies of rescission and damages may be available. For damages under negligent misrepresentation, the courts only award for the expenses incurred. Therefore, negligent misrepresentation will be the claimant’s second choice in light of the type and amount of damages that are claimable. However, the biggest problem in bringing a claim under this head is that it is rather difficult to prove a duty of care as it only exists in very limited circumstances.

The third type of misrepresentation is innocent misrepresentation. This is where the representee is making a statement which he believes is true. This implies that he is neither fraudulent nor negligent, but why should compensate the claimant? The answer is that the representor has nevertheless committed a tort i.e, civil wrong.  Innocent misrepresentation will be the claimant’s last choice under common law misrepresentation, when the claims under fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation have failed. This is due to the minimal compensation granted under it, as only damages in lieu of rescission are available.

Generally, the problems faced by the claimants in making a claim under the common law is due to the difficulties in proving misrepresentation as the burden of proof is on the part of the representee. T is also useful to note that in some cases when a claim is brought against the representor, he finds ways to eliminate the evidence that would prove that he had made the representation e.g. a CCTV recording. In addition the remedy of rescission may also appear inadequate as its grant is subject to ‘the bars of rescission’ and not every claim can fulfill those conditions One should also note that rescission is an equitable remedy and thus is subject to the court’s discretion.

Given the above challenges faced by the representee in bringing an action under the common law misrepresentation, the Parliament has enacted the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Two key sections to be noted are s.2(1) and s.2(2) which were designed to overcome the barriers under the common law misrepresentation. Under s.2(1), if a contract is concluded as a result of misrepresentation and the claimant suffers losses then the representor will be held liable for damages as though he has fraudulently made the misrepresentation even if he did not. This presumption will stand unless the representor can prove that he had reasonable grounds to believe that the statement made by him was true. This shows a reversal in the burden of proof. It mitigates the major problem faced by most claimants under the common law misrepresentation, mainly their inability to discharge their burden of proof. It forced them to step down to a lower level of claim in terms of damages granted, starting from fraudulent misrepresentation then to negligent misrepresentation and lastly to innocent misrepresentation. Therefore under s.2(1) if the representor fails to discharge the burden of proof then the representee is entitled for damages and the contract may be rescinded  subject to the bars of rescission. The damages granted under s.2(1) are reflective of the loss of profit under the case of East v Maurer (note that previously loss of profit was not claimable under s.2(1)).

s.2(2) of the Act only applies if the burden of proof is discharged under s.2(1). An action under s.2(2) is similar to an action for negligent misrepresentation. The damages granted here are based on reliance measure. However, different interpretation has been given to whether under s.2(2) the right to damages is dependent upon the right to rescind the contract. Under Thomas Witter v TBP Industries, the courts have granted the claimant damages when rescission was no longer available. Whilst in Government of Zanzibar v British Aerospace damages were not granted as the right to rescission was lost.

In conclusion, a claim under contract law, i.e, the Misrepresentation Act 1967, is now favoured by claimants as opposed to a claim under tort law, i.e, common law misrepresentation, due to the changes brought about by the 1967 Act due to a reversal in the burden of proof.

Related posts

Regulatory Changes That Enabled the Rise of Challenger Banks

Bridging the Gap: How Mediation Training Can Enhance Your Legal Career

AI ethics or AI Law concept.bias in machine learning algorithms.Developing AI codes of ethics. Compliance, regulation, standard , business policy and responsibility for guarding.

Reviewing the UK’s Right to Internet Access

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Misrepresentation Act 1967: Its Historical Origins and Socio-Political Context

24 Pages Posted: 29 Jun 2022

Alan Brener

University College London - Faculty of Laws

Date Written: June 25, 2022

The creation of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 was the result of work by an expert group of academic lawyers and senior judges. An examination the files in the National Archive of the Lord Chancellor’s Office and other related papers revealed what they did, and why, and the various conflicting pressures on them. In this they were largely supported by the eminent members of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. The legislation was aimed at ensuring justice and fairness for those that bought goods and services and was grounded in the socio-economic changes in post-war Britain. A number of academic lawyers have heavily criticised the legislation. Nevertheless, the legislation has remained almost unchanged, and has endured for over fifty years and has embedded itself in the societal consciousness.

Keywords: Lord Chancellor’s Office Papers, development of contract law, origins of Misrepresentation Act 1967, commercial and consumer law, socio-legal and political context

JEL Classification: K12

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Alan Brener (Contact Author)

University college london - faculty of laws ( email ).

Bentham House 4-8 Endsleigh Gardens London, WC1E OEG United Kingdom

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, legal history ejournal.

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

English & Commonwealth Law eJournal

Law & society: private law - contracts ejournal, legal anthropology: laws & constitutions ejournal.

How to use the Misrepresentation Act 1967

This is a much underused Law. (It doesn’t cover Scotland but Scottish Law is broadly similar). But as well as reading this post you should also see the more updated law Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008  (updated 2014). It protects the consumer from being mis-led or mis-sold goods or services. If you enter into a contract and purchase an item or service because you believed a statement (not an opinion) regarding it, then you can end the contract, get a refund and claim compensation. There are three types of Misrepresentation where a false statement was made:

Fraudulently – statement made by someone that they know is untrue, believe it is untrue or is made recklessly Negligently – statement made carelessly or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth. Innocently – statement made without fault

  View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Helen Dewdney (@thecomplainingcow)

Fraudulent/negligent statements

If you entered a contract as a result of a fraudulent or negligent statement you can cancel the contract. You can also claim damages in most cases. These claims are on the basis of negligence or fraud. The person who made the misrepresentation has to disprove the negligence. So for example, if you book a holiday on the basis that it is a holiday where children are not allowed and find that when you arrive the place is overrun with children then this is a clear breach. I used the Act  as part of a complaint for a story regarding misrepresenting a holiday booking.

Innocent statements

This is considered to be when either party enters into a contract having reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true. The contract is usually just cancelled in this situation.

Under Section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 the court has the discretion to award damages instead of allowing you to end the contract if it deems it appropriate. It cannot award both, judged on nature of misrepresentation and losses suffered.

Limitations

If you chose to continue with the contract although you were aware of the misrepresentation you will not be able to end the contract or claim damages. For example if you booked a holiday knowing that the hotel described in the brochure was family friendly but you knew this was a mis-print due to other factors in the brochure or had had it pointed out to you and you proceeded with the booking you will have, in law, “affirmed” the contract.

You need to act quickly after discovering the misrepresentation. For example, if you have been sold a mobile ‘phone contract on the basis of receiving 500 free texts a month and you have continued to use the ‘phone for a few months before complaining about being charged for them a court may say that you should have complained the first month in which you were charged. All cases are different though and are assessed as such.

I quoted this Act in a case against NatWest and Sunmaster . Which category of statement do you think they fell into? Have you used this Act? Will you now you know about it?!

More recent  useful consumer Acts

People think of misrepresentation and think ah there’s a law about that. Yup this one. However, you now have more cover with more recent laws, so you should also see  Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008  (updated 2014).

You are also covered by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 if the item does not match the description, is not fit for purpose or of satisfactory quality.

Further help from The Complaining Cow

More details on how to complain in the book, information, advice, laws and template letters  How to Complain: The Essential Consumer Guide to Getting Refunds, Redress and Results!

Purchase and download templates to get refunds and redress

You might also like

Banking complaints highest in a decade

I still see you, nectar and ebay relationship loses its sweetness, newsletter sign up.

Email address:

If this site or a response from me has helped you, please consider buying me some chocolate (don’t like coffee!) to help me continue to provide this free advice. Thank you!

201 comments . leave new.

I purchased a brand new car just under a year ago. The advert for the car clearly stated that the annual road tax for the car is £0 (The same advert is still on the website and I have made a copy). This week I recieved my road tax reminder and it says it is £30 per year. I have since double checked this on the DVLA website and it is correct, the car produces 116g/km of CO2. The tax cost has not changed in recent years, therefore the dealer must know the advertised imformation is incorrect. They are a large well established multi-franchised dealer and must have taxed many hundreds, even thousands of vehicles the same as mine. Also, the car was purchesed on a PCP finance agreement using Suzuki finance. In my eyes, this is clearly misrepresentation. What can I do?

Many Thanks

Please see Buying a new car See Consumer Rights Act 201 5 and tips .

Hi I have bought a car privately for £9,650.00. I have done the full vehicle check (including HPI and the mileage check). 2 or 3 days after, the vehicle had a transmission fault on the dashboard. When I asked the private seller about any faults with the vehicle apart from the little dents, he said “the car is perfectly fine”. I have taken it to the garage and have been advised that the gearbox needs replacing and that this problem was there for some time. I have spent £2,250 to get the gearbox replaced as he did not accept to pay for it. Do you believe I have a valid case for the seller deliberately misrepresenting the vehicle to me? Your help is most appreciated.

This from the AA website on buying a car Private If you buy privately, it’s a case of ‘Buyer Beware’. You won’t have the same legal protection as you would if buying from a dealer and it’s up to you to ask the right questions and inspect the car thoroughly before you buy. It’s a good idea to get an independent engineer to give the car a thorough mechanical inspection, and to get a car history check to make sure there’s no shady past.

Because your legal rights are more limited, unscrupulous dealers may masquerade as private sellers: be very wary if a private seller wants to meet you somewhere other than at their home, or if their name is not on the V5C registration document. A dealer pretending to be a private seller is committing a criminal offence.

The only legal terms that cover a private sale contract are:

the seller must have the right to sell the car the vehicle should match the description given by the seller the car must be roadworthy – it is a criminal offence to sell an unroadworthy car and an MOT certificate from a test several months ago is no guarantee that the car is roadworthy today.

I recently purchased 110 chairs based on a sample chair supplied as it was made to a high standard and very comfortable. When they were delivered they were not of the same quality and had a fraction of the padding of the sample chair. I complained straight away and was told that they did not deem the chairs to be faulty or worthy of replacing. Is this situation covered by this Act?

Please see Consumer Rights Act 2015 . You’re welcome.

I recently bought some garden furniture online from a reputable retailer. The picture showed a parasol and in the written description it referred to “sitting under the shade of your pretty parasol”. The furniture arrived without a parasol and only then did I realise there was some small print saying parasol not included. However, the picture and the description are both very misleading. Is there a case u see the Misrepresentation Act?

Not really. You can try and use it and the other links but sounds like if in the picture and description you are unlikely to get anywhere. If you bought online you can return within 14 days using Consumer Contracts Regs . – only paying postage if says so in terms and conditions. You’re welcome.

Hiya, thanks for your reply. But if in the picture and description and in my order confirmation email it is showing the furniture with the parasol, they are misrepresenting the item. I got duped. I didn’t see the small print. Are they allowed to use such false advertising to sell the product and then just get away with it by adding a disclaimer in the small print? It’s really misleading.

As I said, it is worth trying to complain and using the other links in the post. Difficult to comment without seeing everything. Follow the tips and threaten Trading Standards. More details in the book.

We have just arrived at a holiday destination to discover the room we have is not the same as the room we have booked. We booked a sea view suite with a whirlpool on a panoramic terrace. We have a sea view suite but no whirlpool and no terrace. The holiday companies website clearly stated that a sea view suite comes with this. Following our complaint to the hotel they state that their website (a separate website) clearly states that a sea view suite does not have a whirlpool in its accommodation listing. They insist that the fault lies with the tour operator and not them although they acknowledge that the tour operators website is incorrect.

We have spoken to the holiday operator that we booked through. They have now amended their website removing any mention of whirlpools (thankfully we have screen shots of the website before they changed this). The hotel are informing us that all of the rooms with a whirlpool are booked for the week so there is no chance of getting the room we thought we had paid for.

We have asked to be upgraded to the next level although the hotel cannot authorise this unless the tour operator confirms they will pay for this. Coincidentally the next upgrade room is a private pool room. When we made the complaint I checked the hotels website to see if there were any private pool rooms free for the time we are here. There were. Following the complaint we have now been told that the room is on hold and someone is considering taking it for the week. They cannot release the room for 24 hrs and then will only release it if the other party do not make a reservation.

Where do we stand? We are torn between trying to enjoy a holiday or coming home and getting the solicitor involved as we have been mis sold a holiday. The only reason we came to this destination and hotel was due to the whirlpool room and sea view.

Also what happens if we do get an upgrade? We have lost a day of our holiday trying to sort this out and will lose at least half of tomorrow if not the whole day. If I accept an upgrade can I still pursue the tour operator for mis selling?

Please see All you need to know about booking/complaning about holidays . You’re welcome.

My mum just got back from a holiday in Bosworth Hotel. The brochure pictures a lovely building, bedrooms, restaurant, cocktail bar etc, etc but my mum ended up staying in a newer extension to the historic building being advertised, using none of the rooms pictured. When she asked about the lovely bits she saw in the photos, she was told that was part of the old building and wouldn’t be where she was staying.

Would this act apply here? The place being pictured and described in the brochure isn’t at all what my mum ended up with. But that’s what she paid for.

You’d be hard pushed really unless accommodation was inferior or didn’t match description – would need more detail but you can make up your own mind – by looking at holiday posts and Consumer Rights Act 2015 . You’re welcome.

I have purchased a bathroom and have been advised that a charge would be refunded if a particular issue did not arise, which didn’t.

We are now being refused a refund for this amount (on a loan taken via them) on the basis that they did other work not relating to what we were advised this charge was for?

Is this covered under this act?

See Consumer Rights Act 2015 and Tips .

Hi We went on one of these ‘blanket trips’ in Spain and signed a contract to purchase a mattress from them. The representative said head office would contact us within the next 7 days to get the exact bed measurements and as the mattresses are made to the exact measurements and we could cancel right up to the point that we gave the bed measurements to head office. The company did not contact us for about a month, by this time we had purchased the item elsewhere. They are now saying we have to pay a 20% cancelation fee because we are canceling outside their 8 day cooling off period. We only signed the contract because the rep assured us we could cancel if we changed our minds, but we had to sign now to get a certain deal, exclusive to Spain, this turned out to be untrue as you can get the same deal on-line. Is this misrepresentation?

This Act covers the UK. Please see laws covering EU . If you bought in the UK see the link in the post and Consumer Rights Act 2015 . You’re welcome.

Hi Although we signed the contract in Spain the company is based in Birmingham and the contract says it is subject to English Law. I sent them an email saying they were at least contributory negligent, and I have had an email back from the company head office in the UK saying “we apologise for any misunderstanding in relation to the order and as a goodwill gesture will reduce the cancelation charge to 10%”, this is still £130 and they have suffered on loss, it was us that was misled. Can you tell me, do we have to pay this or is this an admission of fault? Thanks in advance Carla

As in the comment above – you are covered by the CRA please click link and read post and Tips and complain accordingly.

Hi I booked a UK boating holiday on a self drive cruiser( broads sunrise) the craft was discribed in the brochure as havjing constant hot water but when we went to use the hot water it was cold on returning the boat I said we couldn’t get hot water without running the engine for about 45 minutes the guy that checked us back in said we wouldn’t get hot water instant as that system had been removed a while ago I ask why it was still stated in the description and the reply I got was error on our part

See Consumer Rights Act 2015 breach of contract and Consumer Protection as well. They have admitted fault redress required. You’re welcome.

I have just moved into a new house, and purchased a services package (internet) beforehand. I originally brought Sky but after talking to company (cable.com I believe they are called, who sell services on behave of other services provideds, like a compare the market) and told me a better deal with an internet provide called Plus net, saying I could have fibre, unlimited, within 5 workings days etc…. I cancelled with Sky for this better deal

I received a letter from Plus net, saying thing thank you, we have your order and its being processed, nothing to worry about your route will turn up 1 day before you go live 4 days passed and still nothing about my router, I called them up to see what was happening In short they were waiting for me to call them…. I had no indication they needed me to call them, they advised the notes where on my ‘’portal’’ ….. I have no internet; how could I check? (in short, no data on my phone, and work I’m lucky to just look at my e-mails)

So it was lucky I called up about my router or this would have gone on for longer. After about 30/40mins into the call I was then informed that I couldn’t have fibre any more, not enough ports. I was annoyed about this as their copper speeds were the worst out of every one who I had spoken to, and if known I would have stuck with Sky and when would someone call me to let me know? (there reply was… we sent a message on your portal). So my account was put on hold until I spoke to their sales team to talk about a new contract, during the course of that very night with my account ‘’on hold’’ I was receiving Text messages now saying My home phone services will be up and running the next day. The next day comes more texts saying My home phone services is up and running …. Of course this wasn’t the case as … it should be on hold and I still have no router

I spoke to them again to find out what was happening to my account, and thinking about cancelling due to this, and not getting stuck into a 12month contract with very poor internet. I explained to them that I was aware of a 90Day waiting Period (not guaranteed) to be moved onto fibre

I said if I could have a clause in my contracted saying that I’m willing to wait the 90days for fibre and if I’m not switched between that time frame I can cancel my 12-month contract with them (with no charge)

The first person at PlusNet suggested I could ask for that in my new contract, when I transferred I was turned down pretty quickly. After going around for about 10-20mins I then found out that this person hadn’t even asked a manager if it was possible, she was going off what she thought.

Currently I am waiting for the call back from the manager but I wanted to know if I have a leg to stand on. I have had this happen to me once before with vodaphone , saying I could have an upgrade (when I wasn’t due on) to try and make a sale, this turn down a very ugly route that went on for 4 months with the ombudsman involved

Sorry don’t have time to read through all this please see Contact and C onsumer Rights Act 2015

I have just redeemed a Virgin Experience Days voucher for a Big Cats Photography Experience Day. It was given to me as a present (not sure of the exact cost, but it’s around the £100 mark). The accompanying letter attached to the voucher states “During this 5 hour course you’ll learn how to capture great photographs of big cats and other animals…………”. Upon redeeming the voucher I received e-mailed confirmation and a copy of the itinerary which states “9:30 Arrival, 12:30 Close” which is only 3 hours (far short of the advertised 5 hour duration). On querying this with Virgin/Acorne I was told that their information sheets have now been updated and no longer make reference to the 5 hours duration. Would I be entitled to a refund of 40% of the voucher value to make up for the missing 2 hours?

I’d certainly go for something – that is a classic breach of consumer law. You paid for 5 hours and got 3. Use Consumer Rights Act 2015 T he Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and Tips You’re welcome.

Hi I am wondering if you could help me.

I bought a house 2 years ago from a builder. My solicitor raised a query about an internal wall being removed in the kitchen in 2001, and asked to see building regs. I have in writing from the vendor ‘not a load bearing wall so no building regs required’.

I now have reason to believe that this was in fact a load bearing wall. It looks to me like there is some sort of support in place, but I have no idea if this is suitable, and there are no building regs. There are cracks around this support that were not there when we bought the house.

I will be speaking to a trusted builder this week who will be able to tell me if the wall was load bearing. If it was, and the vendor has lied and said in writing that it was not load bearing, what can I do? Is this misrepresentation, and could I sue him?

False or misleading descriptions about properties are covered under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (amended in 2014) You should also use your surveyor’s report. You can sue but I would take specialist legal advice on this. It may be that you also need to sue the surveyor which would complicate things.

Thank you for the advice. I did not have a full survey unfortunately, I relied on the information put in writing by the vendor on the property information form.

Could you advise if I was mis-sold a License agreement. I was told I would be the sole personal trainer in a gym if I used this company as they also had an agreement with the gym. When I first started there was another personal trainer working there which prompted me to complain as I was paying a monthly rent for this license. My area manager advised me to speak to the gym manager as this should be happening, to which the other personal trainer was told he could no longer work there. I have since reviewed my contract and it states they grant the license to the licensee on a non-exclusive basis. I have evidence in the form of the gym manager and the personal trainer at the time that I was the sole personal trainer however the contract states otherwise. I also note that I had been offered a job at another gym before accepting this agreement but the whole reason I opted for this agreement was because there were other personal trainers working in the other gym.

Employment/business law not consumer sorry – contact CAB

I agreed to buy a new car last Tuesday as the salesman told me (over email) that had two available and I could have one early May. This essentially made me buy the car faster because I wanted the quick delivery rather than the 6-8 weeks it would take for normal manufacture.

A free days after my order I asked about delivery and was told it was in 6 weeks (start of June)…

The offer of the available car was not mentioned and now the salesman won’t answer my emails.

Please Consumer Rights Act 2015

Thanks, I’m not sure how that helps me.

Not provided services with reasonable skill and care, breach of contract so long as you had everything in writing about what you were getting for your money then you can prove breach of contract. See Tips for complaining and see New cars.

Thank you I will write an email to the salesmans manager tonight.

I contacted the MD of the garage but all I got was a general statement about how cars are subject to the manufacturing process etc. I really don’t know how to move forward, I said that I wanted the car by the date stated on my order form but I’m being fobbed off. I was straight up lied to and now I’m stuck.

I have given you all the posts regarding cars, ADR schemes and legal rights and tips. After you have gone through all of this then your only option is legal action but frankly if all you are disputing is a delay in delivery then you are extremely unlikely to get anywhere. You have probably signed terms and conditions that state something about delivery and for cars I would not say that it was unfair terms. It is certainly not a case I would take on.

Hi, I’ve booked a package holiday with First choice, I was told by the travel agent that the hotel is very quite and ideal for families. I booked as I was led to believe the spaces for free child places would go and would have to pay a lot more. I’ve found out the hotel is undergoing work at the moment and I contacted the hotel, they confirmed this, know one can confirm that work will be finished, only saying it is scheduled to be finish on 4th July, we fly out on 14th July. I’ve also read reviews and it states hotel is really busy and full of children in which I don’t mind but I’m taking my daughter who is autistic and I feel that this would cause her a lot of distress and if any work is going on she will need to wear her ear-defenders the complete time, I want her to enjoy the holiday. I really feel upset and believe that I’ve been completely mis-led. I want to change the holiday destination, even go for less days but they’ve said I would have to pay £50 per person!!! 7 in total are going, I haven’t got that, taken 2 years to save for this holiday. Do I have any rights? Thank you

If you aren’t given what you booked it is a breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and see the Tips. Really busy and full of children is not being misled at all. However, the agent did have a duty to tell you about works if they will still be going when you travel. ABTA has rules on works in resorts which you can quote.

Hi, We recently booked a hotel room which stated next to the list of amenities for a regular room that it would have a queen size bed and bathtub, on arrival the room was so small that it only had a king size bed and a shower tray, also it states free parking but then find that it only has enough parking for a 1/3 of the rooms and the rest would have to park on the street and pay. am I within my rights to complain for falsely advertising the room?

It has parking but should say limited if a big problem. You weren’t given what you booked which is a breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and see the Tips .

Hi I was contacted by phone asking if I found my that my Facebooks ad worked, which I agreed they did. I was offered a one month ad (plus one month free) to be shown round 1 million people on Facebook in a 50 mile radius of where I my business was for £100. I had a drop in business at the time so took up the offer only to find out they were a marketing company, which they did not initially say. I was also to be given a portal link to see the ad and stats about the ad.

The advert did not go live till day 8. The portal took me to a blank page and on asking got told thats what customers wanted so they can alter the ad themselves.

I usually have a good increase in views from a FB ad but nothing changed even though it was suppose to be shown to maybe 30 + thousand a day now? I felt very dubious and cancelled the ad on day 11 as I was going away.

I came back to a report saying I’d had 50 thousand page impressions to my site, but on my stats I had had 3, none from FB. My views are normally in the 100s not thousands which is why I know the report is false and I have kept copies.

They will not give me a refund / partial or full because it went over 7 days? And because my credit card company took the payment back off them, they are now asking me for the payment plus a £45 charge extra to be paid within 14 days or they are sending debt collectors and will black list me. I have never not paid anything in my life. Can they do this thanks?

The terms said no refund after 7 days but I feel misled and also that no add even exists? They emailed me after 3 weeks to say the ad was cancelled but are now saying it was out there all the time and I have to pay for it? But I know it hasnt because a recent ad brought more custom again that I added to FB myself? I dont know what to do. Thanks

See Tips and Consumer Rights Act 2015 (breach not providing services with reasonable skill and care) and post above with links.

Hi, I’ve recently registered with a professional dating agency and prior to joining I asked them to search their system against my specific criteria requirements. I was sent the results via email. I felt quite positive as a result and registered. After a bumpy start I relayed this info to the MD and have since been informed that this number is entirely inaccurate! All comms via email which I’ve saved. Can I approach them under this Act and request a full refund? I feel as though I’ve been misled to part with my money.

Not clear – who misled? You relayed the info to the MD? Of the company or one of the results? If it simply that the person you wanted to meet has given wrong contact details then it could be an administrative error or simply a mistake by the person. In any case the website will say that it is their terms and conditions that they are not responsible for the information given by members. It has been in the news recently about these agencies not being responsible for vetting their members in anyway as some have attacked and raped women on their books, so if they can get away with not dealing with reports about members attacking other members you won’t get them on anything less.

I wonder whether you can advise on what I think is a mis-sold holiday. I went to a travel agent for advice on destinations for a holiday to celebrate my son’s 4th birthday. We had only two non-negotiable criteria: A flight less than 3 hours and there must be a waterpark as our son wants to celebrate his birthday there. The agent suggested Salou as it met our requirements, stating that not only is the flight short but there are two massive waterparks to choose from. Fast forward 8 months and I’m looking online for waterpark tickets to find out that neither waterpark will be open whilst we are there, they open a month later. I feel this is mis-selling as our decision was based on inaccurate information given to us. What do you think?

The Package Travel, Package holidays and Package Tour Regulations 1992 cover the package holiday. Your contract is with the tour operator and not the agent. However should you specifically ask the agent to act on your behalf and s/he says a specific booking request has been carried out and it hasn’t you can claim for this against the agent. Various posts on holidays on the blog and more information and templates in the book.

I just bought a dining table and chairs (Furniture Choice) and found that the table has marks on it that were not on the images of the table on the sellers website. I have spoken to the seller and they have mentioned that these might be old photos on the website and they sent me a couple of images from their showroom table, which has the same marks, although the close up images from the table on their website has no marks and that’s the image that convinced me to but it. They have mentioned I can send the whole lot back but I’ve got rid of table & chairs we had and will have to wait until they get it back to get any refund. I’m just really disappointed

I have just purchased a new car on Finance. The salesman told me when I viewing the car (before purchase) that it comes with Mirrorlink technology and explained that I could connect any Smartphone to it and it would mirror the phone’s screen on to the car dashboard screen so I could use any App including the SatNav of my phone. I have just taken delivery of the car only to now find that this system only works with a limited amount of smartphones (about 30 in all) and of course, mine isn’t one of them. For me this was one of the major factors in choosing this particular car only to now find that this option is actually useless. I feel this car has been mis-sold to me – would I have a case to return the car? Thank you

Put it in writing see if company is member of motorcodes and their arbitration scheme if necessary. You will need to prove that he said “all” smartphones which would be difficult-you should also look in any paperwork about the car and what it states. If that states “all” then it is a breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. as not matching description.

I entered into a Car Lease Hire agreement. I was told at the time that I would have to put a £500 ‘refundable’ deposit. I changed my mind and went back to the dealer. They refused to give me back my money but I stood firm. They then said that would refund my money within 24 hours. Needless to say I did not get the money despite promises made. Unfortunatly, they took my paperwork and would not give it back to me, so all I have is a bill of reciept :o(

Can I claim under the Misrepresentations Act 1967 and, if so, what are my chances of success ?

Many thanks.

Depends on terms and conditions set as to whether it is Misrepresentation. If it says non refundable for change of mind for example, although you could claim Unfair contract terms for that possibly. Please see the links in the post. Complain to ceo of company find contact details at ceoemail.com. They must give you a copy of paperwork and they must make you aware of terms but see all that in the links.

Just to let you know, I received a cheque from them today !

Personally, I thought they would have tried to hang-it-out as I did not have any paperwork.

I guess it is a case of lessons learned by me and I will be more circumspect when handing over my money in a form of deposit. In future, I will demand to see where it says I have to BEFORE I do. If it does not, I will walk away.

Once again, many thanks.

Thank you glad the advice helped – you should buy the book 😉

I purchased a car at a cost of £18,000 from a large car supermarket dealer that had advertised only one owner from new. 2 weeks later, when I received the logbook it stated 2 previous owners. The dealer advised they will investigate and get back to me. Am I able to cancel the sale agreement and return the car for a refund? I have driven about 500 miles since purchasing the car and receiving the logbook.

Please see post above and links within it. Take a photo of mileage at point of informing the garage.

Hello hope you can advise. I accepted a job offer and left my previous employment because of this. My role did not materialise after working for 3 months with the new company as they did not win the contract – I was told the contract had been won before being asked to hand in my notice (have recorded telephone call to prove) now I’m being made redundant. With no job?

Employment Law not consumer so can’t advise sorry. Sounds damn dishonest though. I’d give CAB a ring they will be easily be able to advise on this.

Purchased a 3 in 1 hot water tap which stated cold water Filter aswell , plumber fitted but only boiling water Contacted company they said it was a mistake on website & would not offer refund where do i stand

Thanks m connor

Please read the advice in the post above plus links within it. Also Tips . Even if mistake on their part you still have right to refund see above.

hiya i bought i kitchen from a high street diy supplier. i specified that i wanted a white kitchen. at point of sale, when i was entering the credit agreement and getting all my sales documentation, the salesman printed the kitchen design in a different colour. i told him, ‘no it should be white, i want a white kitchen’ and he printed it in white for me. i signed the credit agreement. months later the kitchen is installed and it isn’t white, nor even available in white. i complained at the time (less than 10 days after installation) but was told by the high street diy supplier i was deemed to have accepted the kitchen. i am now trying to sort out a settlement on it and various other issues do to with the work done by them and their installers. which acts am i covered by? the kitchen was never available in white, so i feel it was mis-repesentated to me and therefore mis-sold to me. but too much time has passed to get it taken out (+ i can’t bear to have them attempt to do anything else in my home anyway). so i’m trying to sort compensation etc

Depending on when you bought the kitchen you need to use Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 or Consumer Rights Act 2015 . Use the tips here email the CEO quoting relevant law plus misrepresentation.

thanks. i’ll let you know how i get along. apols for taking so long to return to this.

do you have a view on the furniture ombudsman? the supplier of my k & b have occasionally mentioned them. however, i have read elsewhere that the furniture ombudsman’s decisions have better protected the interests of their members (diy stores etc) rather than the interests of consumers.

Personally not used Furniture Ombudsman but I think very good. Often people don’t like the ombudsman when they don’t see in their favour…

Hello We have agreed a contract for a ‘glass extension’ that in the sales literature has a flat roof and slim profile frame and bi-fold doors etc, if you picture the sleek glass boxes you might see on grand designs. What is being built is more a traditional lean too conservatory with thicker profile section, sloping roof and much bulkier bi-fold doors. We were told at the point of sale that the roof would actually slope back a few degrees and drain into a box gutter at the house wall. When the surveyor visited to do the detailed design work, he said we could not have a flat roof. After much discussion we accepted this and finally agreed to a 5degree pitch but as a result, now in construction, we have much bulkier crossbeam frame at the front because it has to absorb the roof load. Misrepresentation?

Would depend on what you had in writing and what you agreed to in writing to be able to take it further. Not misrepresentation if you agreed to changes, mis sold perhaps if told you wouldn’t have bulkier frame.

Ok thank you it’s with their board of directors now so will see where we get to. Many thanks

Hello, I bought a property based on the fact it was in place where it clearly isn’t. It was advertised at Poulton le fylde and we were given an fy6 postcode but this postcode was soon crossed out by the mail man. It turns out we are not in Poulton but outside of the border where house prices are cheaper, this is causing us problems now as we want to sell. We purchased the house 6 years ago from An estate agent in Blackpool.

A judge would think it reasonable for you to have done your own research and looked at more than one property in the area at the time. 6 years on prices fluctuate and you would have to pull out a heck of a lot of properties that were being sold in the area at the time and compare to even have a chance in court. Personally don’t think you have a tiny chance at all. Sorry.

Hi, Very useful article. Could I use this act in the following issue. I took out a contract with yell.com to advertise my business. The contract small print said minimum 6 months but their sales rep, stood in my kitchen told me twice in the space of an hour that you could cancel at anytime, even after a month with no problems.

I realised the product want what I needed and mailed them after 2 months telling the to cancel and I cancelled my direct debit. They have now sent the dept reclaimers after me and insisting I signed a 6 months contract, despite what was being said to my face when I signed.

Any advice would be appreciated. Kind regards,

You can try but if you were to go to court you would need the evidence, so would depend on the contract, the small print of which you are aware. You could argue unfair contract terms under Consumer Rights Act 2015 but this is also business to business so you should take legal advice as consumer law doesn’t always apply.

Thank you very much!

What protects a policyholder from misrepresentation caused by innocent mistake?

Would this apply when I was told prior to completing a 50% deposit payment (for my wedding dress) and signed paperwork/invoice that there were no nasty terms and conditions in their contract, that the deposit is actuallu non-refundable?

Not really, quite a standard term, especially when work is started on bespoke item, if you change your mind and they have started work they should not be out of pocket. However, if the item is in breach of the Consumer Rights Act , e.g. not of satisfactory quality then the deposit is part of the total of which you are entitled.

Thank you. I have been offered an exchange (so unlikely they have started making it as given me one month to decide). I cannot find an alternative that’s suitable and they are not offering a credit note or any other solutions. I assume it’s goodbye to my £700 deposit. They also took 50% for alterations after the dress arrived-which I will not require, plus 50% for accessories that I hadn’t made a decision on at that time as I was told they could be swapped at anytime. I feel cheated as it’s clear my dress has not gone into production and they have also taken half the price for things they knew I hadn’t made a firm decision on at the time the deposit was taken 🙁

If you just changed your mind and there is nothing wrong with the item then you aren’t really covered. However you could argue unfair contract terms, as no work has been done under Consumer Rights Act 2015 and Consumer Contracts Regulations . Use these plus the tips and threaten Small Claims Court. It would be up to you if you wanted to take the risk of proceeding.

Hello, Would it be classed as misleading in that I booked a hotel room at the express by holiday Greenwich inn at £186 in November based on their website saying they only had a few rooms left. Now I see the same room and date is £153. They are trying to tell me prices fluctuate but I only bought in advance because their website said only a few rooms left. ..Please help.

Common practice I’m afraid. Had it actually said that the prices were likely to go up and you based your decision on it then it would have been a breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 but it didn’t. They all do this – with that stupid box coming up saying “x number of people are looking at this room right now” and similar stuff. All luck of the draw I’m afraid. Sod’s law.

Ok thank you 🙂

As my grandad would say…The best wit’s bought wit if you don’t buy it too dear…lesson learnt

You’re welcome, sorry not the news you wanted especially when you are one of the very few people to say “Thank you” on here!

Went into EE mobile phones Worcester informed them I required pay as you go phone and that I only would use it for emergency as my wife has her phone attached to her ear.I only required it for when I would be out shopping on my own and contacting my wife. He indicated a row of phones from a couple of pounds to several hundred. Under each ones price it said a ten pound top up was required. I thought that was fair enough and purchased a Mobile. On trying it out at home a message came up that the ten pound top up was for 30 days and would be renewed every 30 days and changed o my credit card that I used for the purchase. I want to take it back as I was misled and return my money. Is that okay

Should be. See also this post . However if you signed a contract then it wasn’t a pay as you go which is what you need. Could be one word against another which will be difficult but see also Tips for complaining .

I signed a contract of 3.42Kwh solar panel contract first. and because it too long to improve our electric system. the salesman came again and said an upgrade contract get my wife signed it. so a 3.0kwh system but same price and cheaper panels. we can not prove the saleman’s word of upgrade. no wruting or recording. can we say it is a fraud? we did not even get a copy of thecontract. but because my wife signed it for me so the company insist it is valid.

Please see this post on Consumer Rights Act 2015 , this post and Tips for complaining

I have had a used approved car from a dealership and was told before the purchase that the mot runs till Nov 2017 via email. To confirm this I called the sales guy and he confirmed it on the phone too. When I went to pick the car I was told the MOT document will be posted to me. After constantly chasing the document, I received it 2 weeks after picking up the car. The MOT actually expires this year in July and has a long advisory list. The sales manager is now looking into this for me. I think it is complete misrepresentation and they should pay for a new MOT with all the advisories sorted. Is there any advice regarding further steps that you can provide?

Please see the post above, all the information you need is in that and the links therein and also this post .

Hello, I run a small health drinks business. In November 2014 I was contacted by a publishing company that publishes celebrity endorsed magazines. I was offered a last minute deal of an ad and internet-based “extras” in a magazine supposedly endorsed by a well-known TV celebrity doctor, and have written proof from the company that this was to include a readership of 500,000 and distribution throughout WH Smith.

The magazine was three months late being published and I received none of the promised “extras” and could not locate a copy in any branch of WH Smith or high street newsagent. I also received zero response to my ad and have spoken with others advertisers who also received no response and could not locate the magazine in any shops and who also dispute the claimed readership figures. So I withheld the second half of the due payment (£1080).

I have since been threatened and intimidated by their finance department into paying the full rate care as they insist I have breached their terms and conditions yet have managed to obtain a letter from WH Smith HQ stating categorically that they have never heard of this publisher nor ever stocked any of their publications.

The company then issued a Statutory Demand on me personally which I had to spend two weeks away from my business to collate the evidence required to have it set aside. This I succeeded in doing, but how do I now take action citing the misrepresentation act to have my original payment of £1080 refunded to me, with compensation for the time and significant stress expended? Would this have to be through the small claim track?

This is business to business not business to consumer so wouldn’t like to advise. I would threaten them with the Small Claims Court for what you have already paid, but biz to biz you may be able to bring in other things and suggest you take legal advice. Also sounds like possible fraud to me so I would get in touch with Action Fraud as well.

I had a infrared heating system installed , based on facts related to me by the sales rep, and also verified by his main office. My old system was ripped out and the new installed. When the new system started to operate with colder weather,it was soon clear that non of the sales blurb was evident. I complaind to the installer who sold me the system and they did a few modifications , with no positive result. This as been going on for about three months, I have asked for said system to be removed and my money returned as the system is not as related to me prior to sale. The company has now stopped selling and fitting this system,I do believe through multiple problems with it.can I use the misrepresentation act 1967. In this case, i seem to be getting nowhere. Thank you.

Please see the post above and all the links within which tell you what you should do.

i am already in a monthly contract with o2 which up to now has been fine but there were issues with a monthly payment which to cut a long story short lead to an adviser stating (which i have in black and white as it was over online chat) that i would no longer need to pay for a part of the tariff, yet when the new bill was generated and statement was received i have been request to pay this part too and when contacting o2 again they have basically said sorry for the misinformation but everthing is how it should be so pay ! could i not state that this falls under the misrepresentation act ?? help just need some advice on the direction to take ?!

Everything you need to quote is in the post and the links. Also see tips for how to complain and this post specifically about being mis-sold a contract.

could you please help me and let me know whether the below is misrepresentation or miss-selling:

In May 2015, I visited the London Wall LA fitness branch to enquiry about their packages as I was interested in joining but wanted to know whether I would get discounts as part of the company I work for provided Gym perks.

I had clearly explained to the advisor that the only reason I was switching gyms as the previous gym opened too late in the mornings, as I had work at 9am, and it was over overcrowded when I usually finished, around 6pm.

Either the advisor was not listening at all or he decided to omit the fact that the mornings are peak times at London Wall. I also told the advisor that I was going on holiday so wouldn’t be able to go to the gym for 3 weeks therefore I was just enquiring and would consider my options once I returned as did not make sense to pay for something I wouldn’t use for nearly a month. I ended up being surrounded by another advisor and the manager who claimed that because of this I lacked motivation and made other derogatory remarks. The advisor then insisted on offering additional products, including a 2 hour free personal training session. What was just meant to be a general enquiry ending up with me being pressurised into signing up.

Furthermore, on every visit, I was unable to use the equipment that I wanted due to lengthy waiting times (and I seriously mean having to wait a LONG TIME) caused by overcrowding during peak times. You may suggest exercises with alternative equipment, but it is extremely frustrating having to change my workout because I can’t use the equipment that I signed up for or having to queue as an alternative equipment is being used too.

Since I felt that I wouldn’t be able to achieve my goal, as every time I visited I was constantly having to change my workout plan and wait, I decided to cancel my membership.

I was under the impression that my gym membership would be cancelled after I had visited the London Wall branch to resolve an issue with my direct debit details not being on the system (although it was provided when signing up). The advisor at the desk told me that I had to make one month’s payment to cancel, which I did on the day so my membership should have been cancelled. To my surprise, I received letters from LA fitness saying that my account was in arrears by 5 payments.

I contacted the complaints team on a few occasions and they offered what they called a “gesture of goodwill” below: As a gesture of good will and to bring this issue to a close, we are prepared to offer you the following solution.

You pay 3 of the outstanding 5 payments, we extend your agreement by 2 months and transfer your membership to LAX Aldgate.

I then replied with the following:

Dear Mr John Pell,

Thanks for your email and I apologise for the delay in responding as I have been on holiday.

It seems as if you may have taken my previous email out of context. My email was not a request for an early cancellation but was instead explaining that I had visited the London Wall branch to cancel my membership and was told by the advisor that I had to make one month’s payment and then my membership would be cancelled.

Although the cancellation policy is in the terms and conditions, the role of an advisor is to advise, which I am sure you would agree. Therefore, as a customer, if I was looking to cancel my membership, the advisor should have advised me of the correct process instead of giving me false information. Therefore, the advisor was not doing their job correctly or had intentionally given me the wrong information. Additionally, the advisor that signed me up had promised me 2 hours of free training with a personal trainer however when I enquired with a PT, I was told that I would have to pay. I believe this further highlights the poor level of customer service I was given and the focus instead on sales and getting more membership.

In regards to my second point about the gym being over crowded, I understand that gyms may get busy at peak times but this is unbearable when you have to wait a VERY LONG time (not a little) before being able to use the equipment. Furthermore, I was even unable to use alternative machines as I had to spend more time waiting to be able to use it. As a result, I spent the majority of my time waiting instead of actually working out. Would you not feel extremely disappointed, If you were paying to use the gym but spent most your time waiting for equipment that were vital for the workout plan you set for the day? Would you not feel extremely disappointed if you decided to change your workout plan and use other equipment but still had to wait a VERY LONG time as it was very busy? If you are paying for something you can’t use and your workout plan is affected, that is a good enough reason to cancel as I feel I would have struggled to achieve my goals.

I believe the gesture of goodwill that you have offered is unfair given the level of service you have provided, especially from your advisors. I am sure you would agree that a fair solution for both sides would be to extend our agreement by 5 months, covering the period that I was under the impression my membership had been cancelled based on the “advise” I was given by your “advisors”. From your response, it sounds like you are willing to extend our agreement, therefore this is a fair solution as it means that what you consider as “outstanding payments” are covered by the extension and although I am disappointed by the experience I have had with LAX fitness so far, I can finally go back to achieving my goal of staying fit.

I really do hope that we can finally resolve this issue and mend our company and customer relationship.

I look forward to hearing from you and hope you have a Happy New Year.

This then prompted the following response:

Dear Mr Sala,

Thank you for your most recent response.

Your comments regarding the information you were given by the member of staff at LAX Aldgate have been noted and addressed with the General Manager for further review. Please be assured any training or customers services issues will be addressed accordingly.

Unfortunately we cannot remove the outstanding balance from your account and extend the agreement by 5 months. Your account is now in arrears by 6 months. As previously offered by my colleague, we would be willing to accept 3 payments and extend your membership by 6 months. This is the maximum length of time your contract can be extended by.

Please contact our Revenue team on 01302 892 437 to arrange the payment of the outstanding amount.

I am sorry if this was not the outcome you were hoping for.

If you require any further assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me,

Kind Regards, * Notice how the their offer went from an extension of 5 months to 6

I feel what they are offering is an insult since it is clear that I was provided misleading/incorrect information by their advisor when I visited the branch to cancel my membership. Additionally, although I was in arrears by only 5 months, the extension by 6 months would mean a total of 9 additional payments instead of 5.

Although I’m very disappointed with their service, if I cant cancel my contract, I feel it is fair for both parties to extend the agreement so it resolves the dispute of the period I believed my membership was already cancelled.

Thanks for your help in advance and I look forward to hearing from you.

PS sorry about the length of my message.

Please also note how in their latest response they say “Your comments regarding the information you were given by the member of staff at LAX Aldgate “. This shows me a lack of care and highlights that they do not plan on doing anything as my complaint has always been about the London Wall branch. Therefore this person did not even bother read my email properly.

Please see here .

Ho could you pleaae telk me if this is misrepresentation. Or anything like. I bought a wedding dress 2 year ago. The dress cost 1300 and any alterations wwre agreed at £20 ( written on the reciept. However i was contacted by the seamstress about 3 month ago saying that she would never do alterations for the amount of £20 and that she didnt know why the owner of the sbop had said that as she was an independent seamstress. Any advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

See this post . You have evidence of the cost of alterations and your contract is with whom you gave the money, i.e. the shop. If this shop and seamstress are one and the same then your contract is there. Use the tips to complain and this post .

Apologies for the statement, i also meant to put in, please could you help. 🙂

You said “please” which is a hell of a lot more than many on here!!

I entered into a contract with Sky Tv for fibre broadband in November 2014, we have moved house since then and unbeknown to me i had entered into an 18 month contract.

I recently called them at the start of December to request a break down of my monthly bill. It was during this phone call that i was told by the operator that i was out of contract with all my subscriptions and was now on a rolling contract, and no further charges would be outstanding for termination of contracts.

To that end i called BT and they had promised me they would half my telephone and internet bill each month if i switched to them. I authorised the request and am now awaiting the switch over.

When i called Sky today to ask why my bill was still including sky broadband and land line for next months bill, they told me that it would be re credited to my account but that i owed £87 in early termination fees for quitting my contract 5 months early.

Now i had previously been told that there was no early termination fees to pay as i was out of contract on all accounts. Now they are saying that it was operator error their side and that i am still liable for the fee.

If i had been made aware i was still under contract then i would not have terminated early and would have seen out the final 5 month contract with Sky.

Any thoughts please?

This is why I always say to people do everything like this in writing without exception. You have no evidence that this is what they said to you. Anything in writing you can easily use. You can try asking for a transcription of the call if you know dates and times and if you are very lucky you will get it but I doubt it. You need to go through the contract with a fine tooth comb and see what you signed up to. You could try arguing that under the Consumer Contracts Regs you were not provided with the right information and therefore demand that the cooling off period of 14 days is extended. Use the tips when complaining and ensure you do it in writing. Thank you for saying “please”! have a look at the amount of comments on this post where people are too rude to do so!

Does the misrepresentation act cover my (my sons) circumstances? Can anyone help?. I became aware that my 17yr old son who lives and works independently with his brother, had taken out a mobile sim only contract with ee. and had lied in the shop about his age to get it. the ee shop assistant passed credit checks and didnt ask him for proof of ID. He has since paid his bill without fail till recently, he didn’t understand an extra £10 Charge on his bill. totalling a bill of 29.99. Upon querying the charge my son got uptight with ee call centre and pointed out stupidly he was only seventeen. they had cancelled his services due to job payment before this. After telling me what he had done I advised payment first. which he phoned apologised and paid. but however they now require proof of age before they resume his services. what do I do to help him out of this mess?

Not mis representation. Your son lied. They now know he is is only 17 so of course they will ask for ID. If he has to be 18 to get the contract then he has to be 18! Not sure why you think it would be misrepresentation as the company hasn’t mis represented anything? The only way you could argue anything is that perhaps it was poor service in not asking for ID but not sure you would fare!

My partner was going away to Australia for 5 months his previous provider at O2 claimed that in order to unlock the phone to put in an Australian sim we would have to pay full price for the handset. Before cancelling his contract (as it was up for renewal) we decided to shop around and was informed in a Three store that Australia is a “feel at home destination” so he would be able to use their services abroad throughout the trip. Therefore we cancelled his previous contract with O2 and signed up to Three. Throughout the first two months we have had to pay for several data allowance “add on’s” costing £5 each time claiming to give him “unlimited data” only to find out that they have been capping it at 4GB and 8GB, when the unlimited total is 12GB. During a call to request an add on an advisor informed us that the “feel at home” allowance only applies to a maximum of 60 days within a year and he will no longer be able their services. I called customer services to complain and they said they can only offer me a laughable £5.00 off his monthly tariff per month due to it being a policy issue! I told them that was unacceptable as they informed us he would be able to use it throughout his trip and now he can’t use it. The advisor explained he should get an Australian sim to stop any further charges but if we had known the “feel at home” stopped after two months we would have done this initially. Yesterday a dispute team member offered to credit his account with £150 to cover paying for an Australian sim in addition to his monthly tariff and claimed that is the best they can offer. I have requested a call back from a manager because since being told two days ago (Australian time) his allowances no longer apply, his phone bill has reached over £150 in roaming charges and allowances. Due to the time difference he has got an Australian sim today so the UK sim will no longer be in use. How can we resolve this and still keep his number? He still has 3 months left in Australia.

See Tips the post above and this post

Opps meant to say, “I bought a lether sofa last year”

I bought a leather last sofa where all the cushions are meant to be reversible, because of the nature of the feather filling you must change the positions else the sofa would sag. Yet you cannot reverse the cushions because the reverse sides are made of fabric. Bear in mind small 2 Seater cost £2000. The seller described it “upholstered in full leather.” Would that statement be construed as deliberately misleading?

Please see this post and this one . If you’ve had it more than a few weeks you are going to have difficulty arguing that you didn’t notice the cushions. If the reverse sides are fabric and still match then they are reversible. If description said everything was 100% leather including cushions then you would have a stronger case.

I was interviewd for the post of director for a national charity and during my interview I asked whether the organisationhad any weaknesses. I was tol that the organisation “hadno waekesses”. three days before I took up post I was told that the main bid for funding had not been secured and thet I would have to make the bid myself once in post. As I had given up a perfectly good job to take up this post I was concerned but there was nothing else for it as I had already left my employer. The funding application has been turned down and it looks as though I will be out of work soon. Was the job misrepresented to me?

Take advice from CAB – this is employment not consumer law.

I purchased 205 litres of “traditional creosote” online from Creosote Sales on 29 October 2015. A drum was delivered on 5 November, which I opened on 23 November and it was immediately apparent that it was not traditional creosote, but an oil based variant. I emailed their customer services requesting an exchange on 24 November, but they have not responded to date.

You don’t appear to be asking a question, but this is not misrepresentation. Please see this post

This photographer uses a mobile as he is a admin assistant and does weddings part time. Nothing wrong with that but is this company experienced enough to have your special day ruined if they make a mistake. On there sites the photographs are of models not real wedding one is on an xrated site a well. Should he not put this down on his advert these are models and don’t mislead the public he actual has done loads of wedding shoots but in fact zeal wedding are just amateur photgraghers who do this part time. I’ve seen pictures of my friend she said he gave her a wedding dress and a bouquet she changed in a public toilet and he took pictures. Now some poor bride will look and think he actual did a wedding is this right? Laws should be introduced to protect consumers from this miselling. I know adverts have models. But now if a model is on an advert for a bank there agancy makes them open a bank account with that company to show they are a real customer. FAKE a wedding photographer zeal wedding shows unreal people as real people must be ugly in there eyes

You would have to argue misled public, I don’t think you’d get very far but you can try.

The company is a financial company who is a registered claims company/debt collector. The company was acting on my behalf because I signed their contract . But the bank paid me the compensation and spoke with me directly. The claim was for mis sold package bank account. My partner filled a form in on Facebook thinking she would be getting an information pack, but forgot to tell me. So I received a phonecall from Fairline Financial about making the claim, I have been given the recording of this call. I think they are a no win no fee business so on a successful claim they get 35%. So I signed the contract on the basis of what the adviser told me In the call, so I didn’t have the hassle of going into the bank. The company are not taking into account what I was told in the call, and are asking for their 35% regardless of what was said to me. I will contact my bank to see what was sent to them regarding the claim. Would i be able to get a lawyer involved? This is the callers exact words I ask “what happens if I’m currently paying for this account?” the caller answered ” what would happen if you do win, would be you account would be downgraded to a normal interest paid current account, all your facilities would stay exactly the same like your account number and sort code, the only thing you’d notice different is you’d not be paying the monthly fee” So on this information I was led to believe that my account would be downgraded when I win. When I was awarded the compensation my bank account stayed the same. I had to go into my account and be embarrassed and stressed out that I had to explain the reason why I was downgrading. All of which I thought was going to be done as part of the claim.

See previous response.

Hi, I had a phonecall from a company to do with a claim with my bank. The caller I feel have me mis leading information to sign the contract so I wonder if someone can help me. The caller told me ” when you win, your account would just be downgraded and everything would stay the same,all you’d notice is you wouldn’t be paying the monthly fee. So on this statement because I was planning a move and due to health problems I agreed to sign the contract thinking that when I’ve won I wouldn’t have the embarrassment of going into the bank and downgrading it myself. So weeks went by and I never heard from the company and then I received the compensation, I them found out that my account was still the same, and was not downgraded and I had to do this myself. I have complained to the company but they are denying what was said in the call, I have managed to get a copy of the phonecall, which clearly states what the caller said to me. I have refused to pay their 35% fee because I feel that they have mis led me into thinking that my account would be downgraded when I win. I had to deal with alot of stress and anxiety when I had to go into the bank myself to change the account,explaining the reason why is because I’ve made a claim against them. Surely they can’t say these things for you to sign a contract and then when I’ve won it doesn’t happen and all I get is threatening letters demanding payment without even sending an invoice. Has any one got any advice on the matter? UK law only please

I would need far more detail regarding the account, what the company is, – is it associated with the bank/part of the bank copies of what you signed, what you mean by “won” what the claim was for, was it a no win no fee thing (in which case you would be paying a fee if they got you money) etc. to be able to advise but please read Contact and services for this. Speak with the bank about what the company was that claimed to be from the bank. You need to set up a meeting with the bank manager and take in all the paperwork and have a discussion about what has taken place in the first instance I think.

I’m wondering if you could advise me on my current situation with a well known used-car sales supermarket. I brought a car from them about 8 months ago which at the time I paid £7500 which was resonable for its advertised mileage of 29500miles. Yesterday I was looking through the service history folder and discovered a discrepancy in mileage between service 1 & 2 (15,000 miles at first service and 13000 miles at the 2nd service). Thinking this was a little unusual I dug deeper and found that the car had a speedometer change at 18000 miles back in 2012 which I was not made aware of. So infact my car had in reality 47500miles on the clock not the stated 29500 as it was sold to me earlier this year. Once I discovered this I rang the car dealer immediately and so far they have been very good and are making enquiries with motobility who owned the car prior to them to find out more details. They asked me to scan a copie of the speedometer change record over to them as well as the questionable service history so I have in opinion provided them with sufficient of evidence of misrepresentation. Ultimately they are going to make a full investigation first and keep me posted on the outcome. My concern is that my car has now had a major devaluation in price due to this extra mileage and my car is now due for a service which originally would of been a minor service but is now a major service due to needing a cambelt change etc. They have advised me not to service the car until this is resolved which has me very worried and concerned as we heavily rely on this car for our day to day activities. Would I be correct on saying that under this act that I would be entitled to a full refund for the car in question? Or would it be more likely that I will recieve compensation only? My concern is that I was originally planning to keep this car for 5 years but considering the higher mileage I will be forced to either potential spend more money on this car than original due to ware and tear issues with higher mileage or be forced into selling the car ealier than intended and end up with another car that could have potential problems. Could you advise me on what would be resonable to expect from this dealer as a way in terms of compensation or if I could in fact reject the car?

Thanks Aaron

Please see the post above for the information you need and the link in it as well. Tips for complaining here . More information about cars here .

We bought a children’s buggy privately a few days ago. It was described in the advert as being in “excellent condition”. We bought it for market value, and had my parents pick it up (i.e. didn’t inspect it).

On putting up the buggy it was immediately clear that the footrest was broken, as it could only just hold its own weight, and not any down-force from a tiny child. We contacted the seller who agreed that their little girl could “move it with her feet”. Inspecting the manual shows that the foot-rest should lock in place, but in the one we bought the locking clips just rattle around and have no effect.

In the configuration we would use the buggy (toddler and newborn) the footrest hangs into the face on the newborn, rendering it unusable.

The sellers have subsequently claimed that it was fine when sold, and that we broke it. I have therefore (destructively) dismantled one of the footrest locks and found that the teeth that cause it to lock were heavily burred, i.e. a consequence of gradual rather than sudden damage which would have shown as a shear. I have photos and video of the damage, and have left the other lock intact so it could be inspected by a 3rd party if needed.

I was wondering whether a statement like “excellent condition” is considered a statement of fact, or whether it would be considered an opinion?

Whilst the money involved isn’t significant (I’ve been able to replace the offending seat in the buggy for £90, and the original sale was £200) the sellers seem to have taken pleasure in taking a “you can’t prove anything” approach and so I would dearly love to see if UK law can actually support us.

Much more difficult with private sellers. If they won’t give you your money back your only option is court. I think you’d win but you’d have to look at whether it was worth the risk and if you think they would still pay up if you won. More around the blog and in the book.

Hi, I required some plants for my aquarium as my existing plants had suffered from excessive algae. Searching the internet I found what appeared to be a reliable supplier, they claimed to be experts in the field of tropical plants. I read all of the reviews on this site, which were very positive. I purchased a considerable amount of plants, which arrived promptly and in apparent good condition. I say apparent because within two weeks my tank was alive with snails, snails are not a good thing for an aquarium. I contacted the supplier who sold me a liquid which would remove the snails, needless to say it didn’t and my tank is still alive with snails. I have contacted the supplier who says snails are natural on aquaria plants and if I didn’t want them I should have bought their artificially cultivated variety, which incidentally are not obviously shown on the site. The only way of cleaning my tank and disposing of the snails is to completely empty the tank of fish and plants (which will be discarded) and sterilising it, that will be a nightmare for me and the fish, not to mention the time and inconvenience, what do you advise as I consider the supply of plants with snails to be contrary to my order

this is nothing to do with misrepresentation but faulty goods and service. Therefore please see this post which will give you everything you need to know to take the matter further and you should also see Tips to help you complain.

Hi, I’d appreciate your thoughts. I entered into a fixed term tenancy with my landlord at the start of September. I viewed the house several weeks earlier and was assured that all works on the house would be complete by the time tenants moved in. When I moved in, I found that one of the two kitchens was not fitted with any appliances and the hob and oven were not connected. The third of three bathrooms was not fitted with any units at all (it is an empty room). The property was advertised as fully furnished with three bathrooms and two kitchens, however clearly the third bathroom and second kitchen are not fully furnished. I attempted to contact the landlord on Sept 17th to address these issues but I have not had a reply. I feel I have given the landlord adequate time to make contact with some details on when he will resume work, I would now like to end my tenancy and use the Misrepresentation Act to do so on the grounds that the property was falsely advertised and facilities were misrepresented. Does this sound possible??

Depends on what contract says. Contact the council – all landlords now have to have a licence with them

Please help. I purchased a 2014 Renault Captur from a dealership in July this year. I saw the advert on Auto Trader which stated it had Bluetooth and usb functions and the Captur brochure also advertised Bluetooth music streaming function on its median nav system. The media nav system was the main selling point of the car pushed by the salesman at time of sale. It was not once stated that the system was not fully compatible with all media devices and that the quality of the music will vary depending on its compatibility.

After purchasing the vehicle, I paired up my smartphone with the medianav system of the car and realised that the Bluetooth music streaming and usb recognition was not working, thus leaving me with only radio to use as music (as there is no CD player provided on account of the Bluetooth and sub functions of the car).

When I returned the car to the dealership for this issue to be investigated, the after sales staff admitted that there has been an issue with Bluetooth in all renault cars since beginning of the year and they are currently working on a resolution to it. I then complained to the dealership stating that they had not informed me of this compatibility limitation of the device before purchase and that I wanted to return the vehicle as I would not have purchased the vehicle if I could not use the media system included in it.

They are insisting that they have not misled me as the system is working as intended.

Where do I stand??

Please see this post this one and this one . That should do the trick 🙂

Thanks for response. I used your case to send them a complaint letter. They have agreed that I was not directed to the telephone compatibility list at time of sale, but as the feature was not brought to their attention as important at time of sale they are disputing it was mis sold. They are also citing the vehicle as being used (1year old, still with 3 year warranty remaining) as an issue in not allowing the return of the car. Is this an accurate legal defence?

You are certainly not entitled to a full refund and should agree an amount to be deducted for the depreciation in value of the car/your use. If it is in writing that it was compatible then there is your evidence that you were missold as it is not compatible. Threaten small claims court and do it. If it’s not written down anyway then you have a trickier job. If they have also admitted that there is a problem then this is also in your favour. More info about complaining and Small Claims Court etc. throughout the blog and in the book including a chapter on cars! Good luck.

Thank you. I have been told Small Claims isn’t an option as the car was bought for over £10,000? It had it in writing that there was a Bluetooth and USB function available but there was an omission in the sale, brochure and auto trader advert that these functions are dependent on compatibility?

This post gives you details on Small Claims Court fees. I have now given you all the info you need in the posts and comments. For more detailed advice and help please see the Tips and book .

I recentley bought a car from a used car dealer, it was advertised with full bmw service history, although the dealer claimed the previous owner had “lost” it. The dealer said he would get a new service book and send it to the bmw dealerships to get it stamped, then woukd send it on to me. 4 month kater i still have not got said service book and after many excuses from the dealer he gas now blocked my number and won’t take my calls. The dealership has now changed hands and i have no way of contacting the salesman

You have made statements but not asked for help? Just in case you meant to say “Please can you advise” I suggest you look at this post on cars and tips . Also the post above. All these give you help in what to quote etc. if you want to take the matter further.

back in 1987 i was provided with some quotes to transfer my works pension thru’ a section 32. The quotes all used growth of 13%, 11% and 9%, as was the norm. I eventually chose Norwich Union (having the highest quotes/potential for early pension etc). Come 2015 and retirement day, and plenty of dialogue with NU, it transpires the policy could never pay out more than £6k, as this was written into the contract as a ‘maximum amount’ payable, despite 28 years of letters from NU quoting higher returns, and even in 2015 still telling me there was no restriction… There has been no explanation why there was a limit set, or why they kept quoting higher figures. I am now drawing a pension from this policy as I’m over 65..but the returns are even less than the £6k maximum anyway. NU claim is ‘must have’ been a condition set by my former employer..but even so..why 28 years to find this out ? Does the fact the returns are lower anyway nullify any misrepresentation ?

This is specialist and many many more details are needed to advise. Please see a financial advisor or contact the Financial Ombudsman.

I bought a range rover costing £70,000 last september and it has had 2 major breakdowns

Its under 3 years and Landrover has replaced the engine

I am not happy with the implications of the engine change with regard to reliability and re sale value and have rejected it

The retailer has not accepted my rejection of this car

Can I legally be compelled to keep this car please

Many thanks

See this post and the tips

Placed an order for a new Kia car and was assured it would be a new updated model, for which they didn’t have an up to date brochure. We did some research and found photos of the up to date model, new looking front and rear with twin exhaust pipes and better wheels. We signed the contract on this basis, but it turned out the new version won’t ever be available in the UK, so the Kia dealer is saying it’s not their fault. We went to look at our brand new car today and we’re very disappointed to see it wasn’t what we expected. After signing the contract we made several enquiries to the dealer just to make sure we were getting the new look car and they assured us we were, even providing a print from a website showing the different model. They are saying we can’t cancel the contact. We have so far only placed a £200 deposit. What should we do?

See above post. Quote relevant laws as above. See link and also Tips .

Please read post above and link within

Please help, I am going on holiday next Friday, and I have just received my documentation stating the hotel room is a family room. When I booked, I have an e-mail confirming that the price was for a Family Suite. There is a big difference between the two, and only booked because I was told it was a Family Suite rather than a Family Room. Now I don’t know what to do. They said they are going to e-mail the hotel, but am still awaiting a response. This is our first family holiday for years, and we are flying out on my daughter’s birthday!

Doesn’t sound like misrepresentation, sounds like administrative error. Don’t how you booked the holiday, whether it is package or not or who “they” are which impacts on how you complain. Far more details about holiday complaints in the book . Various holiday posts on the blog, also see tips on how to complain. Refer to proof of booking and state that is what you will be paying for.

Looking for some help please!

A quick summery: A business claims company offered their services to get our business rates reduced, the steps would be as follows 1) They send a letter to the Valuations Office (VO) explaining we may be over-paying business rates 2) VO accepts/declines letter and allows us to put together a case 3) Rating Specialists send in a surveyor and put together the case to the VO

I was told that costs would only be incurred if we agreed to go ahead with stage 3 and pursue the appeal, we decided not to. We are being chased for a cancellation fee of £1000 for their potential loss of commission.

Cancellation fee is present in contract, but in my two meetings with the Rating Specialists employee I repeatedly asked him to explain any and all costs associated with the case, this fee was never mentioned.

Have we been mis-sold? and are we eligible to pay the cancellation fee?

In the contract your word against theirs 🙁 Fight though using the links in the post. Also possibly argue their loss of commission – really likely to be £1,000? If not argue unfair contract under Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

I would appreciate some advice on the following matter. I have bought a sample sale wedding dress at a shop. I was told the dress was a size 14 and that it could be re-sized to a size 8 without a problem. I was also told it was made by a particular designer but there was no label inside the dress so could not verify. After paying for the dress I found out the following: – the dress is in fact a size 16. When you try on wedding dresses at sample sales you are prepared that they are going to be a bit bigger and would need re-sizing but normally this is done up to 2 max 3 sizes difference. I did not check the label inside and trusted the sales person that assured me more than once (when I voiced my concerns about possibly being too big) that it was a size 14 and could be re sized. I should add that they help you dress and pin the dress at the back staright away so could not check the label and also I had no reason not to believe the salesperson. I would not have bought the dress knowing it was a size 16. – I have now been told by 3 different seamstresses that it cannot be re sized to perfection as it is too big – I have also found out it is not a dress by the designer they indicated and that the dress is missing a part (bolero) form the original design.

When I went back to the shop and asked for a full refund on the basis of having been sold a dress that does not match their descriptions they refused and said they don’t have a refund policy.

I do believe that they have misrepresented the dress to make a sale. Not too mention that, as it is, the dress is also not fit for purpose and incomplete.

Do I have grounds to claim a full refund?

Please read the post and links in it for details. Also see this post and these tips .

Hello Complaint Cow

We think the estate agent treated us unfairly and mis-sold the flat (letting the flat) to us.

We rented a flat and moved into the new flat on 1st June and discover cat fleas bite on the 2nd days we moved in. ( added the link for the photos).

When we do the flat viewing , a cat was in the flat and the agent told us that no pets are allowed in the flat and the previous tenant only looked after it temporarily. Also on our tenancy agreement, if we bring any pets into the flat we need to have the flat professionally cleaned with de-infestation and provided the receipt to prove the cleaning.

Now the agent denied all the faults. And every time they offer us solutions makes us feel inferior. They claimed we already entered the tenancy and the fleas problem is our problem. They claimed they did not see any fleas when they did the check after the previous tenant moved out and it is not our business to check if the previous tenant have done the cleaning. We asked for the receipt to prove that the flat was cleaned with de-infestation but the agent cannot provide the proof. Also they said it is not necessary for every tenant to clean the flat with de-infestation before the new tenancy if they checked the flat is clean.

We complained and requested the full agent fee (£300), deposit ( one month rent) and all the cost we spent due to the fleas issues ( hotel stays due to the de-infestation clean, medical cream and the one month storage space fee for our furniture). In addition, to end the tenancy after the first month. We really want to leave on the first week but we need to find a new place. The agent now said the landlord is very good to let us go and they only refund £100 agent fee, deposit and 5 days rent which do not even cover our hotel stay.

We now need to complain again and wait 8 weeks to escalate the case to the property ombudsmen.

The agent said they helped us to do the tenant referencing and rectify the fleas issue promptly but we feel that they should not claim no pets are allowed in the flat when we viewed the flat.

Do you think they mis-sold the flat to us?

I would say so. Threaten legal action. I would say you are entitled to redress for the bites too. More details about further action you can take in the book.

Thank you very much for your reply and I will buy your book to learn more about how to complaint. I think it is very important to know your right and how to get things right. We will insist our claim and take the legal action if necessary.

Thanks again!

You’ll be able to pick out all the laws you can use as well as pages of tips etc.

Invited at a conference in Prague, I was contacted over the phone by “X housing service” claiming they would be in charge of organizing the accommodation for the invited speakers. I had already booked a room at hotel A, but “X housing service” told me I shall book through them at hotel B since all the invited speakers are staying there. “X housing service” told me that the costs would be much less. I had specifically asked if hotel B would be close to the main station and was told it would be just 100 mt away, so in walking distance. Thus I cancelled the reservation at hotel A and booked through “X housing service” at hotel B for 2 night at 110 Eur. It turns out that “X housing service”: 1) is not recognized by the conference organizers as the official organization for hotel accommodation for the conference participants and for the speakers; 2) none of the speakers is staying at hotel B; 3) hotel B is 7 Km away from the main station. Additionally, there is a discrepancy on the amount stated on the booking form and the amount on the invoice, where the number of nights is now 3 and surcharges are applied for a total of 200 Eur. “X housing service” is refusing to refund me, claiming that the reservation is non-refundable. I have filed a dispute with my credit card but it is not clear if this would work. Is this a misrepresentation act?

Please read the post and the links in it to give you the information you need to complain. A complaint isn’t an Act. You may say in a complaint letter/email something about xxx that is in breach of xx Act. Please also see tips .

We had a local plumber give us a quote for fully refitting a bathroom and the removal of 2 sinks (one in the room which was to be a bathroom). He gave us a quote of £3000 which was for a fully fitted, tiled bathroom (complete to walk in and use!) where 2 qualified and experienced plumbers (he was one of them) would be on the job. It would take around 2 weeks to complete. We declined the offer as we found the price was expensive (my brother has a plumbing business in another part of the UK to us), and off he went. A few days later he then rang asking if we had a change of mind. We agreed to him doing the first fix in the what is to be the bathroom and remove the sink in the other room. He quoted us ‘around half’ the price at £1500, possibly up to £1900 with contingencies. We agreed to go ahead with it as the price was ok and he could supply us with the relevant certs that we would need if the local council requested them. He started the job – him and another (quite young lad) came the first day at 10 till 4, then after that came in the morning (we had been warned now by this time to check and write down the hours he was there) and left about 9.30 until 12.30 came back and had his lunch in his van for an hour. He left the young lad while he was away until the last day and he took him with him. When we confronted him, he said that he had needed materials and had gone to the local suppliers. Anyhow to cut a long story short… He finished the job and went off. Then a couple of months later he submit an invoice. Asking for £3000, we challenged this and he provided a breakdown where he was requesting payment for the hours that he and his helper did not work. As it was a quote, we were quite shocked, especially as he had quoted us £3000 for the full job. We have refused to pay, and it is going to court soon to produce evidence. We have been made aware that he has now ceased trading and started working for another company but his solicitor states that it is still our debt and he can pursue us and that they wont confirm if he is trading or not. The evidence we have is photographs of the work he did and text messages of him changing his mind on the helpers wages. He was charging £20 ph for himself and £13 ph for his helper. I’m a bit confused as it was a verbal quote (no paperwork) and unless we have CCTV how would we prove that he had left for the morning and what he had originally quoted. However, we’ve just found out that his helper who he calls his plumber mate was actually a local 17year old, who is unemployed who he pays cash in hand. We have this lads details and found out that this is correct. Can we counter sue him for the monies paid to him for the helper and can we go down the route of the misrepresentation act or consumer protection. I understand that he has done this quite a lot over the years he has been self employed. We are in Scotland so not sure if that’s holds a bearing on things?

Please see this post This post re unfair trading This post re Supply of Goods and Services Act and the post above You can counter sue for any out of pocket expense you have incurred Report to tax office

The small claims court hearing this week held that a misrepresentation had been made and awarded the amount of the claim in full plus costs to the claimant. Also the judgement indicated that the surveyor was covered by the small print.Live and learn.

Well as I said, take legal advice but as it takes months to get to court I guess that you already had taken legal advice before asking my opinion. I am not a lawyer and do not specialise in housing contracts. I take no legal advice for most consumer issues but here I would do which is why I advised it. Feel sorry for the seller though if they have had to pay up thousands of pounds if the mistake was innocent. Shouldn’t it be the people they bought from? Or will they be taking them to court?

I was given legal advice which was not encouraging , rather dismissive . One of the irritating consequences of being old is that one gets the feeling from time to time that one is being treated as a semi -comatose dribbling geriatric .) The seller admitted in court that she knew that the extension existed when purchased and hence the the answer given on the TA6 form was not accurate . Any assumptions that it is only matters which occur during ownership are not correct. As we used to say ” an assumption leads to a screw-up” Thank you for your time.

Ah so she lied! Surprised she admitted that in court! Well then yes she deserved what she got!

Message I sent to our wedding florist.. They will no offer an apology or resolve dispute. Does this qualify for misrepresentation? I have photo evidence.

‘Unfortunately I was very disappointed with the outcome and I feel terrible having to contact you about this but i feel like I should give you my feedback, with respect and privacy.

The bridal bouquet was not as expected. It was far from being a ‘perfect spherical bouquet’, as you had proposed and unlike many of the other bridal bouquets I have seen of your work via your website and Facebook – it looked rather standard, nothing special and very flat. When we met I discussed the importance of me not wanting any greenery whatsoever and unfortunately the stems we not fully covered in the white fabric finish you had proposed.

The bridesmaids bouquets were unusually placed on a very obvious black wrist strap which completely stood out – especially in an all white wedding. It was noticed immediately by the bridesmaids themselves who were also disappointed. It did not compliment the overall colour scheme of the wedding as proposed.

The two ivory rose corsages were completely different for the mother of bride and mother of groom. One was a single Rose and the other was several roses. The ‘corsages’ were wilted and had to be removed before the wedding breakfast began.

The top table was proposed to include chapel candles of different heights to bring impact to the table. Unfortunately the top table was not as proposed and did not meet expectations at all. All the candles were the same height and size.

The wedding cake was proposed to be dressed with masses of white roses. I can appreciate that roses come in many shapes, styles, shades of colours.. Although upon discussion i feel that I did express my wishes for a very white theme. I found the cake to be covered with very yellow and almost green toned roses.

The hero arrangement was a beautiful feature, Thankyou.

I can appreciate that I did not have the biggest of budgets – for the most prestigious of flowers and whitest of roses which do cost more and I hope that this message does not come across rude in any way, as I do not intend it to be.

I just wanted to share with you how disappointed I did actually feel’

Please see this post For your rights and this one On how to complain effectively.

We employed a builder who we are taking to court for a variety of reasons but we have a query with regards to the Misrepresentation Act that we feel he could fit into.

He verbally quoted a sum for internal partitioning however following “completion” of the works it apparently did not include things like skirting, coving, wall sound insulation etc.

He also made a false fire breast and that too apparently did not include insulation, or double boarding which I have found out is the standard in terms of heat and fire retardation. It also didn’t include the formation of a hold for the flue even though he knew it was a balanced flue.

In addition, the exterior of the extension he was building he stated that we could not have K-Rend, yet the house is rendered in this. Having discovered after the alternative render has been applied ( cement and a paint that did not match the colour of the house) that K-Rend could be applied. He then had to hack off the render and replace it with K-Rend. We suspect that the reason he stayed it could not be used was that it is pricier than cement and paint. So we are trying to build a picture of his lack of honesty.

He also damaged Bi-fold doors and a lantern roof when re fitting it, through negligence. But he advised us at the time, that his staff were more than capable to install these high cost items. They weren’t and the consequence is that we had to pay a huge sum to have them fixed and this is the crux of the court action.

Can we use this Act or would the Consumer Protection aspect be better? Would love a chat if at all possible.

Use both. See the posts and take the information from both of them. See also Tips You need to get an independent report from another builder on the work and costs.

Tesco are not members nor are any of the supermarkets so you can’t use it.

The surveyor said he failed to identify the extension as the roof had been painted . Also I expect the small print would excuse any liability and qualify his report only as specialist opinion. Seems to me that an untrue statement on a contract document by the seller on which the buyer relies would constitute misrepresentation with the burden of proof on the defendant to prove otherwise. The contract questionnaire becomes meaningless if one has to check each and every answer for accuracy.

The surveyor should have picked it up. I certainly wouldn’t recommend taking the seller to court!! If you really think you have a case (I personally don’t sorry – but I do think you may have a case against the surveyor) take some legal advice. This kind of thing could be very costly.

My wife and I bought a bungalow last year and subsequently found that a rear extension has been added to the the original construction. No application for approvals is on record for that extension. The seller stated in the standard questionnaire that no extension had been constructed. As an unapproved extension will have a negative impact on any future sale price or sale-ability it is necessary to regularise the situation. The seller claims that she was not aware of the unapproved extension , even though she lived there for twelve years and has no responsibility as the construction was before she purchased. I believe this to be a matter of misrepresentation , possibly innocent, and damages would be appropriate . Any comments are welcome

Would have thought that the surveyor should have picked up on that one. This isn’t Misrepresentation. You may have a case against the surveyor – contact him/her.

Hi – Having searched on icelolly.com and booked a 5 night break to Majorca with Travelsoon, I have come across a problem which I hope you may be able to offer advice on how to handle it.

My search on icelolly.com was (you can still do the same search for the exercise to see the results ): Airport – Manchester Destination – Majorca Date – 10th May – (fixed dates not +/- 3 days) 5 nights All Inclusive

Grade – Then further filtered – 4 star

I came across “Hipo Palace Hotel Hipotels” – liked what I saw and called the agent offering the best price which was Travelsoon. I quoted the code. The agent told me the code was indeed for the date, duration and flights but told me it was an entirely different hotel. She went on to tell me that the hotel I was enquiring about wasn’t an option and not available. I had a look at the hotel she was offering on the icelolly code and it was far inferior. She went through the search with me while I was on the phone, saw what I saw on the screen, said she couldn’t understand it and would pass it on to the “technical department”. I ended the call and continued my search. 10 days later, this hotel is still advertised on icelolly.com on this search.

I continued with the same search, but further filtered for resort – Palmanova Came across – Intertur Hotel Hawaii Mallorca

Again, the agent offering the cheapest price was Travelsoon. I made my call and spoke to the agent – nice chap! I changed my flight times with Ryanair to go early and get a full day in resort for which I was prepared to pay more. I received my Ryanair flight confirmation on an email from Ryanair during the call – all was in order. 24 hours later I received my hotel and transfers confirmation from Travelsoon. My hotel voucher and transfer vouchers were not for: Intertur Hotel Hawaii Mallorca. They are for Intertur Hawaii Torrenova Aparthotel Palma Nova

This is not the hotel I had seen on the image and read the text for associated with the icelolly code quoted, but is, I have since found, the inferior hotel next door.

I immediately called Travelsoon and explained the situation. From the reaction, I had the impression this was not the first time she had heard this complaint!

She quizzed me on what the agent had specifically said to me during the call and asked if he had quoted the hotel’s name back to me – I honestly can’t remember catching the extremely slight difference in hotel names (if he did) and if he had I wouldn’t have noticed anyway! Travelsoon have said they are going to request a recording of my conversation with the agent to see if he had made it clear that he had said: Intertur Hawaii Aparthotel Torrenova Palma Nova and not Intertur Hotel Hawaii Mallorca. And they are going to call me back “within 48 hours” I have said I don’t want to stay at the hotel I have booked but I want to stay at the hotel that was advertised on the screen image and text on the code I quoted. I have followed my call up with a non confrontational email covering the facts and have also sent a message to icelolly.com via their site.

Sceptically, I feel that I may have a battle on my hands.

My question is: Is my battle with Icelolly.com for false advertising/ misrepresentation or with Travelsoon for not being aware of the clarity of their advertising on third party sites which I have seen on 2 separate occasions and have sadly fallen victim to on the second occasion.

Points worthy of note: a) The inferior hotel I have booked did not even come up on my initial icelolly.com search because I filtered 4 star and it is 3 star – ergo, I didn’t see that there was another hotel with a similar name – if I had, I would have known to double check I had the correct hotel. As it stands the 3 star hotel wasn’t on my radar until after the event. b) Does this type of booking come under “distance selling” regulations? I believe there may be some argument for the difference in hotels not being picked up during a conversation when the on screen details were so similar.

Once again sorry for the long message, I’m hoping you can point me in the right direction before I continue

For further information related to your query please see the following posts: Unfair trading Booking holidays Complaining about booking Tips

I recently bought a VW Golf from a gentleman who had advertised his car on the AutoTrader website. I contacted him, asked questions as to the general state of the car, including any bodywork to which he replied that apart from a minor scuff caused by his wife in a car park, it was fine. We met, the car superficially looked ok, he said he was a trainee barrister, which added a sense of trust and honesty to the proceedings. We agreed a price and I left with the car.

I use autotrader because it has an automatic check on any vehicle that is advertised whereby the seller enters the car registration and that is automatically cross checked within the car industry against any insurance write-offs. This requirement is clearly stated to the seller and is stated in AutoTraders terms & conditions – part 2 (ii)):

Before you confirm that you would like to submit your advert, we will use details sourced from the Motor Insurance Anti-Fraud and Theft Register (MIAFTR), operated by Insurance Database Services Limited, to carry out a check to see whether the vehicle you wish to advertise has ever been written off (“Write-off Check”). We do not permit the advertising of CAT A or CAT B vehicles on Auto Trader and will not accept advertisements for vehicles that are determined by the Write-off Check to be in these categories. If the results of a Write-off Check determine that the vehicle is in CAT C or CAT D, the advert may be accepted but will include a statement advising of its write-off status. Links to information about what CAT C and CAT D means will be provided within the advert. You will be informed of the vehicle’s write-off status before placing the advert. If you no longer wish to proceed with the advert, you should not submit it. You can find more information about CATs A, B, C and D at: Insurance Categories.

I immediately booked the car into a VW dealership to have a full service and check, this was completed at the next available time, about 2.5 weeks after the purchase. They revealed various problems caused by the inadequate repair following a serious accident. I did some digging and it turns out that the car had been involved in a Class D insurance write-off.

After subsequently contacting AutoTrader, it turns out that the gentleman had advertised the same car before but this had correctly revealed the Cat D status. He was not successful with a sale so advertised it approximately 8,000 miles later, which is the advert I replied to. This did not have the Cat D warning as it transpires, as confirmed by AutoTrader, that he had entered a car registration for a different vehicle, which matched the manufacturer, the colour and the age of the car he was selling. The automatic insurance check was inhibited so the Cat D warning was never given.

He clearly committed fraudulent misrepresentation.

The car was bought on behalf of my elderly, pensioner father who has limited resources. It has been a huge concern to him that his savings were in jeopardy by this act from this supposedly honest trainee barrister.

I will be rescinding the contract but I feel it right and proper to ‘punish’ the individual and compensate my father for the stress and worry he has endured over the past couple of weeks, not to mention my time and effort in uncovering these facts.

The car was with approximately £9,000, the subsequent car service cost £500. Would I be able to claim damages and how much could I likely claim? Is there any criteria involved when deciding what they should be?

Many thanks for any assistance you can give.

Please see links in the post and Tips .

Hi, my son purchased a car from a “friend” …he has now discovered that the car is a Category C – obviously he has gone back to this person to ask him why and his response is that he did not know. Do we have any recourse under the misrepresentation act?

Not nearly enough details sorry – please see links in the post and contact details. Please read before contacting.

We booked a holiday for last October 20th (1 week) through on the beach, it was to a place called Aqualand Corfu, i will post my actual complaint below. Can i use this Act, as i believe that ‘On the Beach’ misrepresented the holiday and had a duty of care, they are trying to say that they are not responsible as they are only a booking agent.

Good Afternoon,

As per conversation with your Resort Advisor I am writing to complain about the holiday which we have just returned form in Aqualand Corfu.

The main reason for selecting this Hotel was the wonderful Water Park (Details of which are at the bottom of this email in Blue), I have also included the description of the hotel etc from your website.

At no time during the booking process was it indicated that it was end of season and the hotel would be closing down on the day we left.

Waterpark As you can see below the water park is massive , some 75000 sqm, full details below. When we arrived there as only a small area open with 5 slides, only one of which (the yellow one) was safe to use. The black and yellow was dangerous and had inflicted injuries on a number of the guests, the two blue kamikaze slides only had trickles of water so would cause scraping injuries who dared to use it.

The slides were not at all supervised, anybody was allowed to ascend to the top of the slides and take their chances on them, young kids included.

There were three men (don’t know their role) who sat at the park, mainly playing football or texting .

Most of the park was cordoned off with red and white tape.

It was dirty, dilapidated and not maintained.

There was a sign saying open until the 12/10/14, something we were unaware of.

It only opened 12:30 until 4pm.

One day, whilst walking along the side of the slides the drains seemed to overflow all over the path with stinking water.

It appeared that the park had been closed for some time, the water in the lazy river and other parts were green and dirty.

One kids area was completely unsupervised, although signs suggested waiting for lifeguard before going down the slide, this kids area was filthy with flies and dirt in the water.

We booked a maisonette , which should have had cooking facilities, ours had a microwave and a fridge, when we asked to move we were told that no other rooms were available.

The downstairs had mould on the wall, next to where my son (6 years old) was to sleep, he ended up sharing with us.

Our neighbour had cooking facilities, but like us, there was not a single plate / pot / utensil to be found, we at least expected a kettle and cups, something else we were told was not available.

3. Orion Pool Bar / Restaurant / Main Bar

The bar was full of flies, when I asked why the electric fly killers weren’t switched on, I was told that these are only used in summer when they have a fly problem. The bottles of drink had flies all around the lid, the barman even had 5 flies on his hand whilst serving me on one occasion.

The snacks consisted of ham and cheese or cheese sandwiches which you could toast on dirty sandwich toasters, the four snacks were put out at 10:30 and left until 12, by which time they were inedible.

The food in the main restaurant was luke warm and left out for prolonged amounts of time, not once was the temperature of the food checked. This is downright dangerous, especially on the fish evening when the mussels or fish were not hot.

Drinks dispensers were dirty in the main restaurant, the Orion Pool Bar dispensed flies into my orangeade on the last but one day.

None of the pools on site were cleaned by the Orion Pool Bar, people were writing their names in the bottom of the pool.

The roof top restaurant was closed.

Most of the Bars were closed, there was only one open at any given time, when we arrived we asked where the main room was, only to be told that this was it (Pegasus Bar).

Only 3 of the Paid cocktails out of about 10 were available due to lack of ingredients, I asked for a mojito on the first night, I was told it was end of season and nothing would be replenished. I managed to buy a couple of drinks from the shop in reception on the first night, however this was also virtually empty and was not restocked.

4. Sports and Entertainment

Firstly sports, although the animation team tried their best, the equipment they were using was badly worn and in need of replacement. We were told that we could only use the Tennis / Volleyball area between 5 and 6 in the evening as it was locked up, this was also chargeable.

Evening Entertainment, well where do I start?

Probably the worst I have ever seen, your website stated “Day and evening entertainment activities by professionals are also available.” .

The main stage area was closed, apparently this is also where they keep all their costumes to put on shows.

The week went a little like this:

Friday Day – 1 Mini Disco in Pegasus Bar, which consisted of 4-5 songs played on a small system on a table, worst I have ever come across. Music Quiz consisting of 30 questions.

Saturday Day – 2 Mini Disco (See Above) Miss Aqualand – Given the amount of guests, this was ridiculous.

Sunday Day – 3 Mini Disco (See Above) Karaoke – Sung by kids, Animation Team didn’t even attempt to sing.

Monday Day – 4 Mini Disco (See Above) Poor Quiz Highlight of the evening was Bingo, however the prize money was considerably less than the money which was collected. Pool table outside the bar was out of order and not fixed for the remainder of our stay.

Tuesday Day – 5 Nothing at all day or night, which wouldn’t have been so bad except there was nothing for miles around.

Wednesday Day – 6 Mini Disco (See Above) Bingo (See above) Karaoke – Sung by kids, Animation Team didn’t even attempt to sing.

Thursday Day – 7 Mini Disco (See Above) Some sort of quiz, questions included: 1. Guess the Animation teams age

2. Guess the Animations Teams name.

3. Musical chairs.

Not once were there Professional Entertainers, usually we go out when the animation team performs, however we could not do this due to the fact there was no alternative. I could not even use the internet as I had paid 20 Euros for the wifi which only worked once during the week. I also need the internet as I run my own business.

Additional Areas:

The kids playground was dangerous with trip hazards and equipment missing handles. The bus only ran if there was a minimum of 15 people, this meant that on two occasions we couldn’t go to the beach. Others were told that they couldn’t go to Corfu Town. We had to wait an hour and a half for our transfers on the day of arrival. I have taken a number of photos which I can provide to you.

To summarise , we feel very disappointed with “on the Beach”, this holiday was completely misrepresented on the website, at no time was it made aware to us that it was end of season (I have never been to Corfu before), also at no time was it indicated that the main reason for going , would be virtually closed I.e. The Water Park.

The Hotel has replied and offered and accused us of lying.

Please see all relevant posts on the blog, tips, links in above posts, holidays in particular and other posts etc.

I’d really appreciate your knowledge regarding my car purchase and resultant PCP agreement. In Nov 2013 I purchased a car from Parks of Hamilton, at time of purchase I spoke with the Senior Finance Officer and I asked him a specific question which was ‘Can I return the car after 12 months?’ he answered this question very simply by saying ‘Yes’ I asked this question 3 times and each time he simply said ‘Yes’. On that basis I then agreed to the PCP agreement and sign the required paperwork. After 12 months myself and my partner returned to Parks of Hamilton to look at taking out a new car together and I was told I couldn’t return the vehicle without paying a minimum of half of the outstanding finance which works out to be 36 months payments. This information had not been disclosed when I asked about returning the vehicle prior to signing the PCP agreement and I feel grossly mislead. I raised my complaint via their Compliance Officer who dismissed the complaint. I then raised the same complaint via the Financial Ombusman who have also initially dismissed this although they commented that the Parks of Hamilton Finance Officer ‘..did not lie, he just didn’t provide full information..’ which I feel is recognition that he lied by omission and wasn’t clear or transparent in his dealings with me. I have now appealed the decision and I have 14 days to submit my evidence. Any information or expertise you have in this area would be greatly appreciated. Kind Regards, Chris.

Please see this post not providing full information I believe is misleading and causes you to make a different decision.

I would appreciate your views regarding a recent purchase I made, and if it could be deemed as a misrepresentation. I purchased online a hands free bluetooth car kit, with Ipod and mobile phone connection, complete with full installation by an engineer. It was described as ” An in car solution that will work in conjunction with your existing audio system and will offer bluetooth hands free, music connectivity”. After the device had been fitted,I discovered that it would only work, while the engine is running, as soon as I stopped the engine the device powered down, even through my existing audio system will continue to work, without the engine running but with the key still inserted in the first position while stationary. So I would not be able to listen to music or use the device if I’m waiting stationary in my car for long period of time. I informed the engineer the next morning, and he said he would reroute the power to a aux live,when he was due to return a few days later, to replace a faulty lead. He did return and try, but he told me that unfortunately because of the type of electrical system in my car he was unable to do so. He said there may be away to remedy it, by fitted a new switch but he was not sure. I emailed the company the next day, and they replied saying there devices are only designed to work while the vehicle is in motion. I emailed them stating that if I had known that, I would not have purchased this item and it was not stated on there website, or in the description of the device, and that I had expected it to work, the same way as my existing car audio system. I stated that there description of the device of “works in conjunction with you existing audio system” was misleading as I expected it to work in the same way. Do you think based on this information there may be a case/claim for misrepresentation. I would just return the kit for a refund but they will charge me me to remove it, and not refund me for the initial fitting. I have since found out that it is possible to install the device to work so that the engine does not need to be running, and I have offered to pay for the additional part but they will not fit it unless I pay the fitting fee, which is excess of £89. I appreciated any advice you can give me. Many Thanks, Jeremy

See this post this one and use these tips

Id appreciate your time and knowledge over a purchase of a second hand bicycle through cash converters.

I found giant road bike online through cash co. web store that liked the look of and so phoned up the branch to see if it was still available which it was, and so they reserved it for me. The next day i travelled to the store, briefly tested the bike, agreed a price and travelled home.

after a service at my local bike shop i notice the invoice is for a different model of bike and when i questioned it i realised that my bike was a completely different model to the one id seen advertised online through cash co’s website – lesser quality components and older vintage than what was described.

I quickly phoned the branch where i had bought it from and the chap wouldn’t help me as i had tested the bike, bought it instore rather than online and basically should’ve known better.

The issue I’m having is that i specifically phoned and reserved the bike that was described online, there was no mention of it being anything other than whats was stated online and i feel I’ve been misrepresented as they have given false information to persuade me to purchase. – i also took screenshots of the description before it was taken down

my question is if i have any leg to stand on? and if so what would be the best recourse?

thanks in advance

See this post this post and this post .

your a star! keep up the good work.

Thank you – and buy the book 😉

I bought what I believed to be a 3D copy of Dracular retold on Bluray from local Asda store. I believed it was 3D because it had a special 3D cover on it unlike other Bluray on display . Only when I tried to watch it did I discover it was not in 3D. I complained to the store but they won’t refund because it had been opened. I believe the goods are are being misrepresentated by the cover.

What do you think?

Look at this – I’d say breach. Complain in writing, follow the tips .

[…] commission. Really? Not what it says on the website. Tut tut that would be a breach of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 then. (When you enter an agreement on the basis of a statement purporting to be a fact but which […]

[…] Act 1968 (which it mainly repeals), and the Control of Misleading Advertising Regulations 1988. The Misrepresentation Act 1967 covers similar issues […]

I’d be interested on your views as to whether this applies for a different situation. In brief, bought a cinema ticket at the O2 Cineworld. Says on the O2 website 4 hours free parking for Cineworld customers – no separate terms and conditions, no subject to first come first served etc.

Get to the O2, parking is closed unless you want to pay £30 for arena parking. Instead we are directed to the NCP (not run by the O2) where we pay £11.

Contact the O2 – terrible response times, terrible attitude, but their current reply is basically ‘tough’ the O2 was busy that night, car parks were closed and parking was limited to £30 arenasrking to restrict cars (I am challenging this but yet to receive a reply after 7 working days now – chased, no reply). No mention of this on the website. They won’t refund as the NCP isn’t run by them.

I thought perhaps it was breach of contract – I’ve been sold a cinema ticket with parking and I don’t get any parking. They tell me to take it up with the cinema but it isn’t the cinema telling me I get free parking it’s the O2.

Could this be misrepresentation? I’d be interested in your thoughts.

I’d say it was nudging the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 – misleading practice. However it says on the website “Cineworld does not own or operate any car park and conditions of use are subject to change” and therefore they are covered. i.e. the change here was that the car park was full. I think the wording is poor and misleading and they should change what is written but you’ll be lucky to get anything I think. I would certainly have a go though!

Thanks for the reply. My issue is more with the O2 who state on their website that Cineworld customers get free parking for 4 hours with their ticket purchase – no mention of subject to change. I don’t think this is Cineworld’s fault at all – it’s the O2. Unless I’ve missed something else? To be honest I’m now more annoyed with the terrible way they have managed my complaint than my actual complaint in the first place – I bet that’s not an uncommon scenario!

Issue is always with whom you give the money – that is with whom you have the contract.

Thanks – really useful website and advice. Keep up the good work!

Just booked a two day break with a friend two rooms with EXPEDIA you find out where you end up when they take payment so you get it cheaper. However you can filter so we wanted a spa and four star hotel. Even put on the booking form to be sent a menu of spa treatments for my best friends birthday. When I had paid notification came through yes four star but NO spa. Contacted Expedia to let them know about there mistake, re the advertising on the website. I was informed that the hotel probably does do spa, despite me telling the person on the phone it didn’t as I had rung up all ready to book some treatments. They continued to ring them up etc and said that someone would be in touch and they would probably place us in a hotel with a spa facility as it is advertised on the website. However having fallen foul before to this kind of thing I also sent an email. the response I got was quite simple

“Will we be touch shortly looking to revert me? ”

I have replied to that with a few choice quotes of law extracted from this blog and await what they say now. It sounds like they think they can just REVERT the money.

I am assuming they meant refund. However I can see from the website they have not changed anything they are still advertising the mystery hotel as having spa facilities.

Unfortunately it does not and I that was the purpose of booking a hotel with a spa

What are your thoughts?

Complain. Clear breach. Entitled to full refund. See various posts re holidays on here and the book .

• Skip to main content
• Skip to navigation

legislation.gov.uk

• Explore our Collections
• New Legislation
• Help and Guidance

Changes to Legislation

Search legislation, misrepresentation act 1967, you are here:.

• UK Public General Acts
• Introduction
• Table of Contents
• Next: Provision

Print Options

What version.

• Latest available (Revised)
• Original (As enacted)

Advanced Features

• Show Geographical Extent (e.g. E ngland, W ales, S cotland and N orthern I reland)
• Show Timeline of Changes

Opening Options

• Open whole Act

More Resources

• Original: King's Printer Version

Changes over time for: Introductory Text

Alternative versions:.

• 01/02/1991 - Amendment

Changes to legislation:

Revised legislation carried on this site may not be fully up to date. At the current time any known changes or effects made by subsequent legislation have been applied to the text of the legislation you are viewing by the editorial team. Please see ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ for details regarding the timescales for which new effects are identified and recorded on this site.

1967 CHAPTER 7

An Act to amend the law relating to innocent misrepresentations and to amend sections 11 and 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893.

[22nd March 1967]

Back to top

Options/Help

Print the whole act.

• PDF The Whole Act
• Web page The Whole Act

Print This Introductory Text only

• PDF This Introductory Text only
• Web page This Introductory Text only

Legislation is available in different versions:

Latest Available (revised): The latest available updated version of the legislation incorporating changes made by subsequent legislation and applied by our editorial team. Changes we have not yet applied to the text, can be found in the ‘Changes to Legislation’ area.

Original (As Enacted or Made): The original version of the legislation as it stood when it was enacted or made. No changes have been applied to the text.

See additional information alongside the content

Geographical Extent: Indicates the geographical area that this provision applies to. For further information see ‘Frequently Asked Questions’.

Show Timeline of Changes: See how this legislation has or could change over time. Turning this feature on will show extra navigation options to go to these specific points in time. Return to the latest available version by using the controls above in the What Version box.

Different options to open legislation in order to view more content on screen at once

Access essential accompanying documents and information for this legislation item from this tab. Dependent on the legislation item being viewed this may include:

• the original print PDF of the as enacted version that was used for the print copy
• lists of changes made by and/or affecting this legislation item
• confers power and blanket amendment details
• all formats of all associated documents
• correction slips
• links to related legislation and further information resources

Timeline of Changes

This timeline shows the different points in time where a change occurred. The dates will coincide with the earliest date on which the change (e.g an insertion, a repeal or a substitution) that was applied came into force. The first date in the timeline will usually be the earliest date when the provision came into force. In some cases the first date is 01/02/1991 (or for Northern Ireland legislation 01/01/2006). This date is our basedate. No versions before this date are available. For further information see the Editorial Practice Guide and Glossary under Help.

Use this menu to access essential accompanying documents and information for this legislation item. Dependent on the legislation item being viewed this may include:

Click 'View More' or select 'More Resources' tab for additional information including:

• New site design
• Accessibility
• Privacy Notice

• Practical Law

Misrepresentation, Mistake and Non-Disclosure, 6th Ed

Absence of writing, accessories, accountants, actionable statements, affirmation, allocation of business, arbitration, assumption of responsibility, breach of contract, breach of duty of care, burden of proof, carelessness, cause of action estoppel, civil procedure, co-claimants, co-defendants, commencement of proceedings, common mistake, comparative law, compensatory damages, concurrent liability, consumer contracts, consumer insurance (disclosure and representations) act 2012, consumer protection, consumer protection from unfair trading regulations 2008, consumer rights act 2015, contra proferentem, contract terms, contracts for digital content, contracts for goods, contracts for sale of land, contracts for services, contracts (mistake), contracts of suretyship, contractual liability, contribution, contributory negligence, counterclaims, criminal liability, damage to property, distance contracts, duty of care, duty of disclosure, economic loss, enforcement, entire agreement clauses, equitable remedies, exclusion clauses, exclusion of liability, exemplary damages, expert witnesses, fiduciary duty, financial advisers, financial services and markets act 2000, foreseeability, formation of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, fundamental breach, honest belief, impossibility, incorporation, indemnities, insurance brokers, insurance contracts, interpretation, jurisdiction, limitation clauses, limitations, listing particulars, local authorities, loss of chance, materiality, misrepresentation, misrepresentation act 1967, misrepresentation of law, mistake of law, mistaken identity, mode of trial, negligent misrepresentation, non est factum, non-disclosure, oral contracts, partnerships, personal injury, potential lost revenue, pre-contractual misrepresentation, private rights, proprietary rights, prospectuses, public authorities, reasonable belief, reasonableness, recklessness, rectification, representations, rescission (misrepresentation), rescission (non-disclosure), restitution, risk allocation, sale of land, service out of jurisdiction, specific performance, standard of care, standard of proof, statements of case, statements of fact, statements of opinion, statutory interpretation, statutory remedies, subject matter (mistake), summary judgments, surety contracts, termination, third parties, tortious liability, unconscionability, unfair contract terms act 1977, unilateral mistake, unjust enrichment, utmost good faith, void contracts, voidable contracts, words and phrases, written contracts.