This section deals with the liability of the seller under the guarantee. There is a problem here. The section states:
Where the seller of goods delivers a guarantee to the buyer, irrespective of when or how it is delivered, the seller shall be liable to the buyer for the observance of the terms of the guarantee as if he were the guarantor, unless he expressly indicates the contrary to the buyer at the time of delivery.
This could be used as a device for escaping responsibility under the section. The seller, by a number of devious ways, could try to get out of this. The term "expressly indicates" is used. This means that it will be both verbally expressed and in writing. If somebody is trying to sell some product through a well thought out form of words that person may pass on some item to an unsuspecting purchaser. I feel that the phrase "expressly indicates" can be used by a seller to try to escape liability. I would like the Minister to tell us whether she intends this to be verbal or written. Does she agree that there is a distinct possibility of some person evading his or her responsibility through some device?
I am sure the Minister is aware that, if matters of this nature go to court, a lot of verbal evidence will be given and there will be written evidence supplied as well. The court will construe a lot of what was discussed and will take into account things said at different times. A person who has widespread experience in selling may be able through this particular term to escape responsibility by some type of words and get around what the Minister wants to do in this Bill.