Search

How can we help?

Icon

A Brief Overview of the Law Relating to Late Delivery

When purchasing a car, consumers want their new vehicle as soon as possible.  If you look at any internet car forum or motoring magazine these days, it is not uncommon to find complaints about the late delivery of new vehicles and enquiries about what legal action consumers can take.

The two main options are: (i) terminating the contract and refusing to take delivery of the new vehicle when it is ready, and/or (ii) seeking compensation.

Typically, sale contracts used by retailers do not allow the purchaser to terminate straightaway due to late delivery of the vehicle.  The contract would have to specifically state that time for delivery was “of the essence” or words to that effect for the consumer to have an immediate right to terminate.  For obvious reasons, retailers do not include this term in their sale contracts and often will say exactly the opposite.  Merely including a date for delivery in the agreement does not automatically make time of the essence.

In cases where the sale contract does not make time for delivery ‘of the essence’, a consumer who has been subjected to unreasonable delay may be able to impose a deadline for delivery by serving notice on the retailer.  If that deadline is missed, the consumer may then be able to terminate the contract, demand a refund of the deposit and seek compensation.  It should be noted however that some legal commentators disagree with this view, so dealers should always take specific legal advice if served with or relying upon such a notice.

In some cases, compensation claims may be substantial where, for example, the consumer has to pay more to buy the same vehicle from another retailer.  Even in cases where the compensation claim is low value, the dealer will still have lost the profit they would have made on the transaction and no doubt have sent the customer in the direction of one of their competitors.

In cases where the right to terminate has not arisen, the customer cannot withdraw from the agreement and remains liable to pay the agreed purchase price.  They may still be entitled, however, to claim compensation from the dealer for late delivery.

If that deadline is missed, the consumer may then be able to terminate the contract, demand a refund of the deposit and seek compensation.

If the contract does not state a date for delivery, English law provides that the vehicle should be delivered by the seller within a reasonable time.  What is ‘reasonable’ will depend on the facts of each case.  It is arguable, however, that a longer period for delivery may be regarded as reasonable in the case of a hand built, supercar, than in the case of a mass produced, family hatchback.

Most dealers will already have comprehensive Terms and Conditions in place that deal with late delivery.  Dealers should note however that the late delivery of goods has been recognised as a major source of consumer discord and that the law in this area may be tightened.  In the meantime, dealers would be wise not to commit to unrealistic delivery dates.

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 30 November 2017
  • Employment

Closing Report from 2017 UN Forum on Business and Human Rights

Michael Sippitt, Chairman of Clarkslegal and the Commonwealth Environmental Investment Platform, reports from the closing day of the UN Forum on Business and Human Rights in Geneva.

art
  • 29 November 2017
  • Privacy and Data Protection

The Uber Hack: How not to respond to a data security breach

It has been just over a week since the news broke that Uber concealed a major data security breach in which names, email addresses, and phone numbers associated with around 57 million individuals were leaked, including 2.7 million in the UK. Given the scale, it seems likely that the personal data of UK and EU citizens will have been compromised and the reaction of relevant data protection and cybercrime agencies will be instructive for many data-oriented companies going forward.

art
  • 29 November 2017
  • Employment

Further Reports from 2017 UN Forum on Business and Human Rights

Michael Sippitt, Chairman of Clarkslegal LLP and the Commonwealth Environmental Investment Platform, reports further from the 2017 UN Forum on Business and Human Rights in Geneva. One key concern about the future of work in developing countries is the probable displacement of low skilled work by technology.

art
  • 24 November 2017
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Company fined £80,000 for selling personal data without owners’ consent

The ICO has fined data brokering company Verso Group (UK) Ltd £80,000 for a serious and deliberate contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA).An ICO investigation found that the company had supplied personal data to two other companies who then used the data for telemarketing purposes (including nuisance calls).

art
  • 24 November 2017
  • Employment

Failing to evidence right to work is not an excuse to dismiss an employee

In Baker v Abellio London Ltd, the EAT overturned the ET’s original finding of a fair dismissal for illegality. The ET had accepted that a Jamaican national with the right to live and work in the UK was fairly dismissed after his employer had suspended, and eventually dismissed him, after failing to provide documentary evidence of his right to work.

art
  • 24 November 2017
  • Employment

Union bids for recognition with end user not employer

This week a trade union, IWGB, has applied for statutory recognition to represent a group of receptionists, security officers and porters who work at the University of London even though these workers are employed by Cordant Security, a facilities management company with the contract to provide services to the University.