Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Ebay, Distance Selling Regs and Postage


HappyMonday
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5614 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all...

 

Been a while since I've posted here. I hope your all as helpful as I've found it in the past.

 

I recently bought an item on Ebay for £79.99 plus £12.66 postage + insurance.

 

Item was arguably not as described, and certainly would've been unacceptable to me if I were buying it from a shop, but being a kind soul I decided to 'change my mind' and request a refund under the terms of the distance selling regulations cooling off period (in this case, the period allowed for this would've been three months as the seller hasn't specified anything returns policy wise that I could find) rather than going through an 'item not as described' Paypal buyer protection claim.

 

I specified consistently throughout correspondence that I'm unhappy with the state of the item as received etc, and requested that the seller agree to cover the costs of my returning the item.

 

This request was ignored as you can imagine, and since I wasn't greatly fussed about the return postage I returned the item as 'a gesture of goodwill' (as opposed to making them collect it), still harping on about how I should be refunded for the cost of the postage etc.

 

I've now received a refund of the £79.99 original payment, but the seller is under the impression he doesn't have to refund the original postage amount either...Specifically...

 

"Item dispatched by request via express courier so postage cannot be refunded under distant selling regulation. Item returned unwanted,"

 

I've found an approximately equal amount of support and derision of this stance online, though how my agreement to accept dispatch via courier absolves the seller of refunding me the costs of said courier is completely beyond me. Sellers seem to draw the distinction between services and goods when referring to postage etc.

 

This is not the impression that consumers are given by Ebay, or indeed by a number of government sources online.

 

Can anybody clarify the position I'm in before I escalate the dispute?

Debt free, partially thanks to CAG forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Internet auction sites are excempt from the distance selling regulations, however if it was from a trader then your are covered under statutory rights and SOGA applies. If a private sale then you are not covered unless it was misrepresented in some way. Postage is not normally refundable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law is very clear, the seller is liable to refund postage. It's harsh but clear.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

raydetinu is partially correct. Auction sites are not covered by DSR's, and in my experience even 'Buy It Now' on eBay is a grey area. BUT if item is not as described - then whether Auction or not - the seller is responsible for postage.

 

The only time seller is not responsible for postage is if the buyer just changes his mind.

 

If the seller is a business trader, then I would get his exact details, write him an LBA, demanding cost of postage for the LBA, and sue him for the postage plus interest at 8% per annum.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:!: All the information I impart is my advice based on my experience. It does not constitute professional advice. If in doubt, always consult with a professional. :!:

 

:-) If you feel my post has been helpful, please click my scales. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this everyone, I think this one will have to go unchallenged. The faults with the item are too unsubstantial for me to start getting heavy about it, and if Buy It Now on Ebay is a grey area too then we're talking serious holes in the argument.

 

However, Ebay claim that Buy It Now is definitely covered -

 

"The Distance Selling Regulations apply to items purchased via Buy It Now listings and Second Chance Offers on eBay.co.uk. However, they don't apply to auction format listings on eBay.co.uk,".

 

I should've approached this as a defective item etc, and I didn't because I assumed any costs related to the transaction were also covered under DSR return rights. This was stupid, but this information is not made clear in the Ebay help for consumers quoted above, or in the other government sourced information I accessed.

 

Might write something complaining in this respect to those it may concern.

Edited by HappyMonday

Debt free, partially thanks to CAG forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For Robert Harpers benefit, some of the sites I accessed are to be found below ;

 

Legal Guidance for Business Sellers

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

 

Distance Selling Regulations - BERR

 

 

All I can say is, I thought that the seller is liable for both sets of postage if I chose to change my mind and I was doing them a favour not getting heavy about my return postage - Quoth Ebay's guidance for businesses on the matter ;

 

"Under the Distance Selling Regulations, buyers have a period of 7 working days after the date of delivery within which they can cancel the contract (often referred to as the "cooling off" period) and get their money back, including the original postage and packing charges. You must refund the original delivery charges. However, you are permitted to require the buyer to pay for the cost of returning the item, but only if you clearly inform the buyer of this before the contract is made.," -

 

I'm now out both, and it seems from a lot of the internet information that buyers are not as well covered as it at first seems.

Edited by HappyMonday
Clarity

Debt free, partially thanks to CAG forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...