Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

HARVEYS FURNITURE - suite with manufacturing defect confirmed by their own Inspectors


intree
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2340 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

we bought a 4500 corner sofa and 2 seater in March 2017,

in Jun 2017 developed spotting,

long story but they sent out a furniture specialist who did a report and indicated Manufacturing defect!

 

We confirmed to Harveys that we would like a replacement or refund and the problem was there within 6 months,

they stated they will send out a repair company for cosmetic repairs

- we rejected this based on the " cosmetic repairs" which may not be permanent,

they can not guarantee a permanent repair and they have confirmed there is a manufacturing defect.

 

We have written to them rejecting the Sofa and asking for a refund and also a replacement from another brand of sofa manufacturer,

they have not responded,

the suite has been bought under a Consumer Credit Act agreement which is interest free,

please can we be advised what action we can now take under both the CCA 1974 and under the Consumer goods Act 2015.

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

outside of 30 days but within 6mts you cant demand anything sadly

not sure where you got that from....

 

they can repair, but if that subsequently fails, they've had their one chance

so its commensurate refund or replace.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

would probably be difficult to prove it was there at time of manu

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have sent me a report where they have confirmed that it was a manufacturing defect and not due to any other thing, they have also confirmed they can only carry out a cosmetic repair, the defects have been confirmed by their own appointed technicians!

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry didn't spot that bit.

 

 

then go for it

you were at one time under SOGA entitled to a full refund which is now CRA

 

 

hit the finance company with a complaint too

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

write and ring them.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Just received this response despite their own report indicating via the report the damage was caused by a manufacturing defect - please advise

 

I have taken a look into your invoice history and can see that the a complaint was made to ourselves with regards to your furniture on 18/09/2017, as your goods were delivered on 13/03/2017 this then confirms that this was reported outside the first thirty days from delivery.

 

With this in mind and as per the Consumer Rights Act 2015, we do offer a repair in the first instance. Of course, should the repair fail, we would look into further resolutions for you, however at this point we are in a position of deadlock.

 

Whilst we realise this may not be the answer you wished for and we can appreciate you may not be happy with the outcome of our findings, however our decision remains the same and is full & final.

 

Alternatively, at this stage we would advise you to seek further advice; Harveys (a trading name of Steinhoff UK Retail Ltd) is registered as a full member of The Furniture Ombudsman which is approved by government to provide independent alternative dispute resolution services to consumers. We follow The Furniture Ombudsman’s Code of Practice which means that their decisions are binding on us. You are now entitled to contact them if you are not satisfied with our response to your complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go

 

Take your pick which way you want to go

 

Back to what though in post 2

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If those sections back up what used to be under soga then its one of your option s

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi We bought a corner sofa, via credit from Creation Finance, from Harveys.

 

The Furniture has been declared by them as having a serious defect, leather colour running.

 

They offered a credit note or replacement which were rejected as we have no faith in them anymore while they have attempted to complete repairs twice and failed, they will not now release the second report confirming this.

 

Please can we be advised:

 

Under the Sale of Goods Act 2015 we have rejected the sofas and requested they reduce the price and settle with Creation Finance, they have offered us a collection of the furniture and they will pay off the payments and loan to Consumer Finance, we have stated this is going to cause undue problems as when they remove the sofa we have no sofas unitl they are made by another Company, on this basis the refund has been rejected, they offer just £75 compensation and said go to the Furniture Ombudsman.

 

We have issues as we would like to take this to Court and ask for the following advice

 

Are Creation Consumer Finance jointly or singly liable under Sec 75 CCA 1974, If so how do we now pursue them as they have confirmed the fault is nothing to do with them and washed their hands of the issue, THEY CONTINUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM OUR ACCOUNTS.

 

How do we issue a claim against Harveys under CCA 2015 for a substantial reduction based on their own reports one of which they now are not releasing?

 

All help kindly appreciated as always.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi We bought a corner sofa, via credit from Creation Finance, from Harveys.

 

The Furniture has been declared by them as having a serious defect, leather colour running.

 

They offered a credit note or replacement which were rejected as we have no faith in them anymore while they have attempted to complete repairs twice and failed, they will not now release the second report confirming this.

 

Please can we be advised:

 

Under the Sale of Goods Act 2015 we have rejected the sofas and requested they reduce the price and settle with Creation Finance, they have offered us a collection of the furniture and they will pay off the payments and loan to Consumer Finance, we have stated this is going to cause undue problems as when they remove the sofa we have no sofas unitl they are made by another Company, on this basis the refund has been rejected, they offer just £75 compensation and said go to the Furniture Ombudsman.

 

We have issues as we would like to take this to Court and ask for the following advice

 

Are Creation Consumer Finance jointly or singly liable under Sec 75 CCA 1974, If so how do we now pursue them as they have confirmed the fault is nothing to do with them and washed their hands of the issue, THEY CONTINUE TO TAKE MONEY FROM OUR ACCOUNTS.

 

How do we issue a claim against Harveys under CCA 2015 for a substantial reduction based on their own reports one of which they now are not releasing?

 

All help kindly appreciated as always.

 

Thanks

 

I do apologise if i have posted this twice but not sure how this works as need a response as soon as possible!

Link to post
Share on other sites

and I've merged those with you existing thread.

 

creation would be a joint defendant.

but why don't you simply cancel the DD?

 

that way they have no choice but to take you to court

or more likely sell it on.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem is we have a new mortgage deal in December and any adverse credit will cause us problems

 

I would rather get the mortgage and then do that,

 

Harveys offer £75 and then Creation is saying not their problem

they won't release the last reports as they will be implicated

but can I obtain these under CPR 31 now or after issuing the claim?

 

Please, can this post be moved to the legal area, as I don't want to repost, not getting many responses here! thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...