The Consumer Protection Act 1987 Analysis Essay

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 Analysis - Essay Example   In determining whether or not the UPOD was defective within the scope and range of the 1987 Act the courts defer to common law principles.   This approach is manifested by Section 3(2) of the 1987 Act which requires that, when considering whether or not a consumer can reasonably expect a product to be devoid of defects, the court must take into account all of the relevant circumstances.     Ã‚  The manner in which the product was marketed is relevant     For example in Worsley v Tambrands, the court ruled that warnings placed on a package warning of toxic shock were sufficiently displayed pursuant to the 1987 Act.     The government-sponsored campaign which was a general warning to the public was not directly attached to the product purchased by Carswell.   The warning is required to be placed on the product’s package.      In assessing the merits of Carswell’s claim, the court will also take into account whether or not the product can be safely used for its intended purpose. Scientific research reveals that the UPOD may be used safely since the risk of hearing impairment can only arise when the UPOD is used for 2 hours a day for 18 months to two years.   By implication, using the product for less than two hours daily will not endanger the user’s hearing capacity.   However, the government’s warning appears to refute this implication.      Another factor for the courts to consider is the actual cost of reparations.     Hot Ideas can escape liability if they can successfully demonstrate that the cost of repairing the double shock defect would be too great for them to cover with the result that they will suffer undue financial hardship.     In other words, if Hot Ideas can prove that recalls of the product and reparation of the double shock action would cause undue financial hardship, thus may impact Carswell’s claim.   However, the defect was discovered and publicized by the government.      On the facts, the product has been on the market for at least 20 years so that the products cannot be recalled and repaired without much difficulty and expense.