Buyers who turn down warranties still protected by lemon law: Court

SINGAPORE — Even though a buyer had turned down the extended warranty offered by a seller, he is still protected under the “lemon law”, the High Court has ruled.

This law allows the consumer “over and above” any rights that he may already have — such as the usual contractual remedies — as the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act clearly envisions the consumer in a weaker bargaining position compared with the vendor, said Judicial Commissioner George Wei in a judgment released yesterday.

The judicial commissioner dismissed Speedo Motoring’s appeal against a Small Claims Tribunal ruling that ordered the used car dealer to pay S$4,500 for the partial reimbursement of the expenses incurred by Mr Ong Gek Sing.

The lemon law, which came into effect in September 2012, compels businesses to repair or replace a product found to be defective within six months from point of purchase. Mr Ong had purchased a second-hand hybrid Lexus GS 450 for S$138,000 on Sept 5, 2012, but had to fork out almost S$7,000 over the next five months to replace the car’s defective hybrid battery, front rotor discs and tyres. The buyer also later found that the car had not been serviced by authorised agent Borneo Motors since March 2011.

Mr Ong approached the Consumers Association of Singapore and commenced proceedings at the Small Claims Tribunal after he did not receive any reply from Speedo Motoring, despite several attempts to reach the company. The dealer said it had given Mr Ong a S$1,800 discount as he had “opted out” of the extended warranty offered, but the tribunal found that “the car was not ... in good condition” and awarded Mr Ong S$4,500, about half of the amount he had originally claimed.

The judicial commissioner said in his 39-page judgment that the hybrid battery was “an integral component”, even though Speedo Motoring had attempted to characterise the battery as a component that was subject to wear and tear. Furthermore, the car was “relatively new” — its mileage was around 53,842km at the material time. And even though the dealer had tried to ascertain the condition of the vehicle by sending it for a third-party evaluation, the test did not involve an examination of the hybrid battery, the judicial commissioner added.

The judicial commissioner said it was prudent for a used car seller to document and highlight to a buyer any potential defects before a contract is made. “The buyer will be placed in a better position to decide whether to proceed with the sale and the seller will be able to avoid further disputes down the road,” he said.