UK Offence Report

Enforcement powers, obstruction of authorised officers and restrictions on disclosure of information

regulation 4F(2) of The Consumer Protection (Cancellation of Contracts Concluded away from Business Premises) (Amendment) Regulations 1998

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

2 If a person, in giving information to an officer of an enforcement authority who is acting in pursuance of his functions under these Regulations– a makes a statement which he knows is false in a material particular, or b recklessly makes a statement which is false in a material particular, he is guilty of an offence.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
an enforcement authority
Conduct
making a false or misleading statement
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (recklessly).

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: recklessly.

What would breach regulation 4F(2)?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Consumer Protection (Cancellation of Contracts Concluded away from Business Premises) (Amendment) Regulations 1998.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
8 December 1998
In force from
31 December 1998
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations amend the Consumer Protection (Cancellation of Contracts Concluded away from Business Premises) Regulations 1987 (the “principal Regulations”). In doing so, they modify the implementation in the United Kingdom of Council Directive 85/577/EEC, adopted to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises (OJ No. L372, 31.12.1985, p. 31). These Regulations amend the definition of “unsolicited visit” which applies for the purposes of regulation 3 of the principal regulations so that a visit by a trader is considered to be unsolicited if it follows an earlier unsolicited visit during which he, or someone acting in his name or on his behalf, indicated that he, or the trader in whose name or on whose behalf he was acting, was prepared to make a subsequent visit to the consumer. The definition is also amended to make it clear that it covers a visit following an unsolicited telephone call where the person who visits the consumer is not the same as the person who made the telephone call, but the person who made the telephone call was acting in his name or on his behalf. The Regulations also amend the principal Regulations to create an offence which is committed by a trader who enters into a contract to which the principal Regulations apply without giving the consumer written notice of his right to cancel that contract, together with a cancellation form for that purpose, in accordance with those Regulations. The principal Regulations are amended to provide for a due diligence defence and for liability of persons other than the principal offender in a number of specified circumstances. In relation to the new offence, the principal Regulations are amended to impose a duty to enforce on weights and measures authorities in Great Britain and on the Department of Economic Development in Northern Ireland. Authorised officers of these authorities are given qualified rights to require the production of information and to seize and detain evidence. The principal Regulations are amended to create offences relating to the obstruction of authorised officers and the making of false statements. Finally, the principal Regulations are amended to provide for an offence of disclosing information obtained in the exercise of functions under the enforcement provisions. The offence is subject to various exceptions, which allow for the disclosure of information in particular circumstances. A Regulatory Impact Assessment of the costs and benefits which will result from these Regulations has been prepared by the Department of Trade and Industry and is available from the Consumer Affairs Directorate, Department of Trade and Industry, Room 622, 1 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0ET (Telephone 0171 215 0350). Copies have been placed in the libraries of both Houses of Parliament.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.92.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.92 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source