Janice purchased a new home and entered into a rental contract for a sprinkler system.There were no services provided by the lawn care company,only the sprinkler system itself which was installed by Janice.One of the sprinkler heads did not function properly and ran continuously after hours.Janice's basement flooded and she sued the company for damages.The contract contained an exemption clause restricting the lawn care company's liability for water damage to $100.Additionally the contract did not include any express term with respect to fitness for purpose.In these circumstances,given that services were not provided by the seller in relation to a consumer contract,Janice would likely

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Under consumer protection laws, exemption clauses that attempt to limit liability for damages caused by faulty goods or services are generally not enforceable in contracts with consumers. Since Janice entered into a rental contract for the sprinkler system, it is likely that this would be considered a consumer contract. Additionally, since no services were provided by the lawn care company, it is unlikely that the exemption clause would be permitted under sale of goods legislation. Therefore, Janice would likely succeed at trial because the lawn care company cannot escape liability for damages caused by faulty goods or services through an exemption clause.

Janice Purchased a New Home and Entered into a Rental