A Price Rise and the Consumer
A Nassau hardware store raises the price of a popular paint from B$38 to B$52 a gallon without changing the label on the shelf. A customer buys four gallons believing the shelf price, then discovers the higher charge on the receipt. Separately, the store sells a generator advertised as 'suitable for a full home' that fails after two weeks and cannot power the appliances listed in the leaflet. The store's returns policy, printed on the receipt, says 'no refunds; exchange only within 7 days'. The customer is a small contractor who lost a day's work because the generator failed.
1. Identify the consumer-protection issues raised and explain what remedies the customer could reasonably seek.
Read the worked answer
Issue 1 - misleading price display. Charging more than the displayed shelf price is a misleading practice. A displayed price is an offer or invitation to treat that the customer relies on at the point of sale. The customer should be charged the marked price, or told of the change before deciding. Remedy: a refund of the B$14 difference per gallon, i.e. B$56 on four gallons.
Issue 2 - goods not fit for purpose / not as described. The generator was sold with a specific description ('suitable for a full home') that it does not meet. Goods must be of satisfactory quality and match their description. The customer is entitled to a repair, replacement or refund, and the 'exchange only' notice cannot remove statutory rights; such blanket exclusions are generally unenforceable against a consumer.
Issue 3 - consequential loss. The lost day's work is a knock-on loss. Whether it is recoverable depends on whether it was a foreseeable result of the failure and whether the seller knew the purpose. It is weaker than the price and quality claims but can be raised.
Action. Complain in writing to the store, keep the receipt and leaflet, request a refund or replacement plus the overcharge, and escalate to the consumer affairs authority or small claims process if refused.
2. The store argues the contractor is a business buyer, not a consumer, so consumer protections do not apply. Discuss whether this defence is convincing.
Read the worked answer
The store's argument. Some consumer-protection rules protect 'consumers' - individuals acting for personal, domestic or household purposes. A contractor buying a generator for business use may fall outside that definition, leaving only general contract law. If so, the 'no refunds' term might be more enforceable and statutory remedies less certain.
Why the defence is weak here.
- The generator was advertised as suitable for a full home, a domestic description. The store cannot market to households and then deny household protections to a buyer who relied on that description.
- Even in a business-to-business sale, the goods must match their description and be of merchantable quality; the store's own leaflet created the description that the goods fail to meet.
- The misleading shelf price affects any buyer, business or consumer, because it is a misrepresentation at the point of sale.
Conclusion. The defence may narrow the claim for consequential loss but does not defeat the core claims for the overcharge and for goods not as described. The store should refund the overcharge and repair or replace the generator.