Wrong in many (most) instances. If OP's friend purchased the product in an authorized sale, he would likely be protected by the exhaustion (first sale) doctrine. Gist of the exhaustion doctrine is that when a purchaser buys a patented product in an authorized sale, the patentee's control over the use and sale of the product is "exhausted" and the purchaser is free to use or resell his purchased copy of the product. Note - this does not mean that the purchaser could make copies of the purchased product . . . he/she can simply resell the purchased product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaustion_doctrine
Note 2 - Manufacturers can limit post purchase resale of a product via contract law. See Quanta v. LG 553 U.S. 617 (2008) and just about every end user license agreement that comes with software.
Note 3: A version of the first sale doctrine also protects a purchaser's ability to resell products that are subject to copyright. But the Kirtsaeng case that is pending before the Supreme Court might change that.
Edit: Just re-read the OP and noticed that the activity is taking place in England. My comments in this thread are based on U.S. law, not English law. I have no idea how the Brits would treat this situation.
<----- Patent Attorney