Government Provided Consumer Protection

Comment from a reader on "No Legal Remedy For SBMA Leaseholders":

One can only wonder how many SB readers fully understand the meaning and implications of the often bandied about legal term, "caveat emptor."
I make the assumption (but could stand corrected) that the Philippine law is based on the precendent set by the case of Laidlaw v. Organ, a decision written in 1817 by Chief Justice John Marshall, which is believed by scholars to have been the first U.S. Supreme Court case which laid down the rule of caveat emptor in U.S. law. In reviewing that decision, one can conclude that in essence the law is saying, "Hey, Boobie, you better check out all the angles and possibilities before you buy into this pig-in-a-poke." Odds are that the SBMA folks see it this way, too.

In the UK, consumer law has moved away from the caveat emptor model, with laws passed that have enhanced consumer rights and allow greater leeway to return goods that do not meet legal standards of acceptance. Many companies operating in the UK, as well as most consumer based economies, will allow customers to return goods within a specified period for a full refund, even if there is no problem with the product.

Perhaps conscientious Philippine lawmakers could benefit from a sneek peek at Brit law, at least on this particular subject.