Retailer needs help this time!

[liesauk]

Hello all, I do hope that you may be able to help me.

 

I am a small retailer who sells fires and fireplaces on my local high street.

We are having to move to smaller offices due to a downturn in sales and we have been selling off ex-display goods. One fireplace was sold to a lady who bought a fireplace and fire and we installed the goods. She paid a 50% deposit and is now refusing to pay the full outstanding balance of £700 because she says there is a hairline crack in the fireplace which wasn't there when she saw it in the shop. Now I know that she saw it when buying it and the engineer which fitted the fire saw it before it was fitted. When she called to complain I said we would send the engineer out to repair the crack, even though I knew that she had seen this crack before buying. She said it has been done well but is still slightly visable and wants a 50% reduction in the cost!!

 

I think she is trying to pull a fast one and this is my livelyhood. I have offered her a £100 reduction as a gesture of goodwill but she has written back saying she wants a £350 reduction.

 

I can't afford to do this. Am I entitled to take her to court? Its her word against mine at the end of the day and I am loathed to give into this bullying behaviour. Any advice will be gratefully received.

 

liesa

[miss muppet]

Sorry no-one has replied to you on this, all to busy enjoying Sunday lunch no doubt!

 

I think I'd get in touch with your local Trading Standards for advice, they are usually quite helpful and dont always come down on the side of the consumer.

[gyzmo]

... She paid a 50% deposit and is now refusing to pay the full outstanding balance of £700 because she says there is a hairline crack in the fireplace which wasn't there when she saw it in the shop. Now I know that she saw it when buying it and the engineer which fitted the fire saw it before it was fitted. When she called to complain I said we would send the engineer out to repair the crack, even though I knew that she had seen this crack before buying. She said it has been done well but is still slightly visable and wants a 50% reduction in the cost!!

 

Can you clarify as to whether this crack was there when in the shop?

 

If it was you should have pointed it out to her if you were aware of its existence.

 

I do think your customer is behaving irrationally and is seeking a reduction far beyond that which is warranted. Goods must conform to the contract, and it is possible that she has the right to reject the goods entirely, depending on other issues, but I doubt this would be the case now.

 

the law states that it is for the seller to disprove that any fault etc is the responsibility of the seller. However, as the customer has not intimated rejection and seems to be going down the route of repair / replacement / partial refund, I would suggest that you have acted quite properly - at least that's my view.

 

I would do as suggested and contact you local TS dept who do also provide advice to businesses. If this does go to court, it will look favourably on you that you have taken such action and demonstrates that you are willing to comply with the contract and legislation.

 

Do please keep us updated on this. We hear all to often of consumer complaints - its nice to see the other side's point of view as it were!

[liesauk]

Thank you for taking the time to reply to my message.

 

I contacted my local Trading Standards and the lady helped me compose a letter explaining that we were not prepared to accept such a large discount on an already heavily discounted item.

I reoffered the £100 and explained that I would have to instigate proceedings against her if she didnt pay in 14 days. I hope that this gets the desired result or I shall be contacting the small claims court(?)

 

thanks once again and I shall keep you informed.

 

liesa

[gyzmo]

Be careful with the discount. S. 14 of SoGA makes reference to the price where relevant.

 

For example. If two shops sell the same item, one at 50% off due to relocation and wishing to get rid of stock, the other full price, one would not expect the 50% off one to be any worse than the full price one. In this case, the price is not relevant.

 

if however the half price item was reduced due to a fault (pointed out) for example, then the customer must have lower expectations of that item.

 

the last thing you want is the customer biting back saying the actual selling price is irrelevant compared to the discount.

 

But you should give warning that you will expect payment before going to court.