The customer approached at home by a seller of photovoltaic panels can cancel their contract more easily

LCan the consumer who, during door-to-door canvassing, concludes a contract for the purchase of photovoltaic panels, obtain the cancellation of this contract, on the day he notices that his installation does not have the expected performance? claiming a formal defect?

This question is of interest to all customers to whom salespeople have promised (orally) that the monthly payments of their loan would be covered by their electricity production, whereas “this is never the case, as long as the expense, including financial costs, exceeds 10,000 euros for a 3 kWp installation [kilowatts-crêtes] »notes Jean-Pierre Brissaud, expert in energy transition from the company Greenkraft Expertise.

The response was the subject of a reversal of case law, under the following conditions. In 2016, Mr.

Read also | Solar panels: justice sanctions the “mistakes” of credit organizations

In 2018, he requested its annulment from the courts, citing a formal defect in the first. He claims that certain information was missing on the front of the order form (precise delivery date, total cost of credit) that the home seller is supposed to specify, under penalty of nullity.

Tacit confirmation

The company Eco Environnement responds that it cannot invoke the nullity of a contract that it allowed to be executed, knowing its defects, because it is supposed to have tacitly confirmed it (civil code, article 1338 oldbecame 1182). Mr. However, since December 9, 2020 (18-25.686)the Court of Cassation judges that the consumer must necessarily have been aware of it, if the seller had reproduced, on the back of the order form, the articles of the consumer code relating to canvassing.

It assumes that he was able to compare the front and the back, that is to say his contract and the legal texts, and to verify the conformity of the first with the latter: which is quite improbable, unless he is an expert in law. This position is strongly contested by jurists, and certain jurisdictions do not respect it. This is the case of the court of appeal of Douai (North), which cancels MX’s contract on November 25, 2021.

She judges that “ the sole fact that the general conditions appearing on the back of the order form include the provisions L. 111-1, L. 111-2, L. 121-17, L. 121-18, L. 121-18-1, L. 121-18-2, L. 121-19-2, L. 121-21, L. 121-21-2 and L. 121-21-5 of the Consumer Code, in small but perfectly legible, is insufficient in itself to reveal to the borrower (…), the vices affecting this good”. It declares the cancellation of the main contract; it orders Eco Environnement to reimburse Mr.

You have 25% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.

source site-30