PETALING JAYA: Existing laws in the country are good enough to protect consumers, so there is no need to rush the lemon law which is being considered for those who purchase vehicles, say legal experts.
Former Malaysian Bar president Salim Bashir said existing consumer protection laws, such as the Sale of Goods Act 1957, Consumer Protection Act 1999 (CPA), Contract Act 1950, Control of Supplies Act 1961, and Hire Purchase Act 1967 could be strengthened to enhance consumer protection.
While these laws offer consumers recourse for defective goods, he said specific provisions required amendments for better protection.
ALSO READ: Squeezing out faulty products
“It is imperative to fine-tune existing laws by way of amendments without introducing a new lemon law in Parliament,” he said when contacted.
In June, the government announced that it planned to introduce a lemon law or amend existing legislation related to defective vehicles next March for a more comprehensive consumer protection framework.
Lemon law is a statute that grants the purchaser of a car specific remedies if the car has a defect that impairs or significantly affects its use, value, or safety and which cannot be repaired within a specified period.
Salim highlighted several shortcomings in current legislation, such as the absence of a clear definition of “merchantable quality” under Section 16 of the Sale of Goods Act.
The CPA, while offering supplementary protection, allows parties to override consumer rights through specific agreements, weakening its effectiveness in some cases, he added.
Salim, who headed the Bar Council in 2020-21, cited the Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd v NZ Wheels Sdn Bhd (2012) case, in which the court voided a contract over a defective car that failed to meet acceptable quality standards under Section 12(2) of the CPA.
Despite existing protections, he said Section 51 of the CPA did not offer redress against manufacturers if defects arose from external factors after the product left the factory.
He said the CPA also did not allow interest groups to file lawsuits on behalf of consumers, limiting collective action.
In addition to legislative amendments, Salim suggested reforms to the Consumer Claims Tribunal to raise its monetary jurisdiction limits, allowing consumers to seek higher compensation for defective goods.
Lawyer Sharifah Lina Hafizah Syed Annuar supported the proposal to amend existing laws rather than introducing new legislation.
“I believe the current laws are sufficient, and amendments should be broad enough to address all situations,” she said.
She cautioned that amendments might impose the burden of proof on consumers, as far as defects were concerned.
“Suppliers can justify themselves by claiming due diligence, potentially leading to litigation against consumers for allegedly damaging their business,” she said.
However, another former Bar Council president, Datuk Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor, voiced his support for a lemon law, specifically for vehicles.
According to him, while the CPA and Sale of Goods Act offer some consumer safeguards, they lack the specifics required to address recurring vehicle defects, leaving consumers with unclear remedies.
He highlighted the absence of warranty standards and repair time limits, which often left consumers waiting for extended periods for repairs without a proper framework for claiming damages.
“We need clearer warranty standards and reasonable repair time limits,” he said.
Additionally, he said buyers of used vehicles with hidden defects faced inadequate recourse under current laws.
Abdul Fareed, who headed the Malaysian Bar in 2019-20, pointed to the power disparity between consumers and large automotive companies, which he said complicates efforts to assert one’s rights under the CPA.
Negotiating repairs or refunds could be difficult, leading to dissatisfaction and disputes, he added.
Abdul Fareed explained that a lemon law typically shifted the burden of proof to the manufacturer once a vehicle was deemed defective, forcing companies to act in good faith while providing stronger consumer protection without prolonged legal battles.
Under the current system, he said proving defects without expert help could be costly.
“Introducing a lemon law will offer clearer remedies and shift the burden of proof to manufacturers, giving consumers more protection,” he said.
While acknowledging potential benefits of such a law, Abdul Fareed warned of unintended consequences, such as increased litigation and higher costs for both businesses and consumers.
“Careful implementation with clear guidelines is essential to balance consumer rights with business interests and avoid a negative economic impact,” he said.
