Clause 3
Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill
11:30 am
Mark Prisk (Shadow Minister (Small Businesses and Enterprise), Trade & Industry; Hertford and Stortford, Conservative)
I will consider amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4 together, but I confirm that they are all probing amendments, with which I hope to clarify the purpose of the legislation.
I draw the Committee’s attention to amendmentNo. 2, to clause 3 on page 2. I will go quickly through the specifics and then the related arguments. The amendment would strike out subsection (3). My purpose is to clarify exactly how the Government define “a future consumer”. An existing consumer is entirely understandable, obviously, and one understands why future consumers must be a consideration, but the worry is that the resources of the council might be used to try to anticipate people who might be consumers when there are more pressing and emergent issues. I will be interested in the Minister’s views.
Amendment No. 4 also relates to clause 3, but on page 3, and would leave out subsection (4)(b). Again, we seek clarity. Hon. Members can see that subsection (4)(b) says:
“‘goods’ include land or an interest in land”.
My understanding is that, in law, “goods” has a distinct meaning. I refer to the Sale of Goods Act 1979. But, goods as defined here—namely, including
“land or an interest in land”—
appears to be different. Could the Minister explain the difference and indeed the rationale? I ask that for perhaps one reason, although there are more, which I suspect others will be able to identify.
Given that the reference to an interest in land must, presumably, mean a financial interest, is there not a prospect of conflict in the Bill? Someone losingout from a property transaction could, as the Bill is currently drafted, seek redress both under part 2, as a consumer, and under part 3 through the estate agents scheme. That is a potentially conflicting message. I am also interested to know whether the Government believe that a good includes an interest in land, which I think would be a change in many people’s perceptions.
Lastly, amendment No. 3 would insert a new paragraph into subsection (4):
“(d) a person who purchases, uses or receives goods or services for the purpose of their own business.”
The reasoning is very simple: expressly to include and identify in the Bill small businesses—whether sole traders or limited companies—as consumers. Conservative Members, and I am sure many other hon. Members, are keen to see small businesses recognised as consumers; sole traders will be, because they act as individuals, but there is a grey area.