You are required to perform a statutory & regulatory search in regard to this fact pattern:

Pete's Furniture ("Pete's" or the "Company") is located in Toronto. Pete's is known for its cheap furniture ("where the lowest price is the law!"). Recently, Pete's found itself the subject of a major news investigative report related tofailing to refund customers andfailing to deliver consumer goods (furniture and appliances) beyond 30 days, including up to one year in delays in some cases.

Pete also believes becausePete's Furniture's contracts with consumers states "All Sales Final" that there is no requirement to refund the customers if Pete fails to deliver the goods.

You work for Pete's Furniture, and the CEO, Jim Peters, is upset with the media coverage related to hiscompany's failure to provide furniture on time. Jim complains that this isdue to circumstances outside his control because of supply chain delays from overseas. However, the media report claims consumers can take a number of legal and regulatory actions against Pete's if necessary. This includesactions against the Company by the Regulator or the Province of Ontario.

Pete's has retained you to advise the Company on whether it is possible, based on the rules and regulations set out in Ontario'sConsumer Protection Act, that any of Pete's Furniture's actions leave Jim Peters (the Director) or the Company vulnerable to a claim by any of the parties mentioned in the fact pattern, and he wants to know what are the possible penalties.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In answering this question, be sure to analyze thespecific wording of the sections, justify your interpretation of the wording, and indicate what additional information or clarification is required to answer the question.

Disclaimer:This is a hypothetical scenario for educational purposes and not based on real events.

*around 500 words*

Format:

For each relevant section make sure you have: stated each section and subsection number that determines the answer as a Heading; explained what legal rights/wrongs the section's wording provides, and explain how that answers the question set out above.

Example:

Section 2 Interpretation (PIPEDA) -(Not related to this assignment)

Pursuant to section 2, a breach of security safeguards means the loss of, unauthorized access to or unauthorized disclosure of personal information resulting from a breach of an organization's security safeguards that are referred to in clause 4.7 of Schedule 1 or from a failure to establish those safeguards. Under PIPEDA, an organization needs to establish security safeguards to protect personal information. In the fact pattern, there is insufficient information to determine whether there were any safeguards in place.