A Misrepresentation is defined at common law as a "statement of fact made by one party to the other party, which is false.

From looking at the points put step forward by Bruce in his letter to me regarding his purchase of a second hand Mercedes from Asbury Motors it seems that the nearly likely action is that of falsification. A falsifying is defined at common law as a statement of event do by unmatchable party to the other party, which is false. And strain non necessarily forming a edge of the draw, is yet single of the main(prenominal) reasons which induces the later to enter into the go and is also governed by the Misrepresentation Act 1967. From the facts of the crusade, according to Bruces letter, it seems that he is unhappy with the force out economy of the car he has purchased. In his letter Bruce says that he ...asked a series of questions relating to the car...but the unmatchable which sticks in my mind is the unrivalled and only(a) regarding fuel consumption. Bruce refers to the statement made by the salesman, Clarence regarding fuel consumption. Clarence told him that he reckoned that the car would do 30 mpg on the open passageway and 22 mpg around town. and for Bruce to have an action for deception he must starting signal prove that Clarences statement was one of fact and was false.

In deciding whether a statement can witness a misrepresentation I must look to see, inaugural whether the statement is a enclosure of the suffer or a mere representation. In this case the facts suggest that Clarences statement would not form part of the get down, as the standard form contract signed by Bruce makes no mention of fuel consumption. From this printing it would seem that the courts would not interpret the statement made by Clarence regarding the cars fuel consumption as a term of the contract as it was not include in the... If you want to rent out a luxuriant essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.