Abstract:
Consumer redress that arises from consumption of goods and services provided by business operators must be under the law that makes it convenient, fast, economical, and fair. Studies have shown that Thai laws regarding the matter only justify the consumers rights to have their cases considered for redress. However, the laws do not elaborate the specific liabilities of the business operators which is the ground to constitute a case nor the means of the redress. Therefore, in order to get redress, the general principle of law need to be applied. In the issue of liability, the applied law are the law of contract and tort. However, some problems arise. Under the law of contract, only the praties in the contract are bound to each other for the liability that may arise. Therefore, this may not be practical, because, according to the marketing system and consumption condition, the consumer is not necessarily a party in a contract with the business operator. On the other hand, under the law of tort, the burden of proof that the business operator is at fault rests upon the consumer according to the fault theory. Therefore, it is a difficult burden on the consumer because the fact and information about goods and services belong to the business operator. Moreover, the procedure to get redress is still only to take a case to the court, which is difficult, time consuming, and expensive. Eventhough, the substitute litigation mechanism under the Consumer Protection Act B.E.2522 helps ease the problems, there are still restrictions under the privity of contract theory. The author proposes that these problems can be resolved by cleary enforcing the strict liability rule on business operators which certain exceptions as may be appropriate. Under this scheme, the consumer no longer have the burden of proof. Moreover, the definition of Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act B.E.2522 should be amended and expanded to include consumers who are not the parties in a contract with the business operators. The amendment will make the substitute litigation mechanism more productive and effective. Furthermore. The author proposes that there should be an appropriate organization to mediate in the compromisation. Combined with the substitute litigation mechanism, this method of compromisation will make the redressing process fast, economical, and fair to all parties. This proposal must be included in the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 which is a special law. The author belives that this proposal will make the consumer redress convenient, fast, economical, and fair to all parties. As a result, the business operators will be more careful in producing and distributing their goods and services; therefore, improved standard and safety that will benefit consumers and public in general.