Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you Rocky for the clarifications though they did cause a problem at first since an original windsccreen ticket was  of a different breach some time before. The current windscreen ticket only states that you were parked there for 6 minutes which is just one minute over the minimum time allowed as the Consideration period. There is no further proof that you parked there for any longer than that is there? More photographs for example? Moving on to the Notice to Keeper-it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. First there is no parking period mentioned on it. there is the time 20.25 stated which coincides with the W/S ticket but a parking period must have a starting and finishing time-just one time is insufficient to qualify as a parking  period as required in Section 9 [2] [a] . Are there any different photos shown on the NTK comapared to the w/s PCN? Not that that would make a difference as far as PoFA goes since the times required by PoFA should be on the NTK but at the moment Met only appear to show that you stayed there for 6 minutes. Another failure to comply with PoFA is at S9([2][e] where their wording should be "the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; ". You can see on your NTK that they misssed off the words in brackets. Met cannot therefore transfer the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable. Then their is the discrepancy with the post code on the NTK  HA4 0EY which differs from the post code on the contract and the Post Office Postcode Finder which both list it as HA4 0FY. As you were not parked in HA4 0EY the breach did not occur. In the same way as if you were caught speeding in the Mall in London, yet you were charged with speeding in Pall mall London [a street nearby] you would be found not guilty since though you were speeding you were not speeding in Pall Mall. I bow to Eric's brother on his reasoning on post 12 re the electric bay abuse  That wording is not listed on their signs nor is there any mention on the contract of any electric charging points at all let alone who can park there or use them. He is quite right too that the entrance sign is merely an invitaion to treat it cannot form a contrct with motorists. Also the contract looks extremely  short no doubt there will be more when we see the full Witness statement. As it stands there is no confirmation from Standard Life [or Lift !] on the contract that Savills are able to act on their behalf. Also most contracts are signed at the end of the contract to prevent either side adding extra points. So their percentage  chance of winning their case would be somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02.    
    • @dx100uk no, haven’t received any correspondence as of yet. Still waiting on a court date but seems to be taking forever. Have noticed an increase in unhappy customers on here
    • They threatened to do this to me (as per the thread I made). Sent me some over-dramatic emails and texts counting down the days until someone would visit me (and advising I still I had a chance to "resolve it amicably" rather than deal with their agent). Not only did they never send anyone, but any underpaid monkey that did turn up would have only got a  two word response. Just a new scare tactic, even if they arrive. 
    • I'll have a good read through tomorrow evening. As dx says, anything in the public domain ... Two things.  No WS from CEL yet, right? By coincidence I had a quick look through your thread last night while half asleep.  I see there's nothing about Keeper Liability in the WS.  To avoid another half-asleep search ... did you out yourself as the driver when you appealed?
  • 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

Unfit goods already replaced and the SoGA/CCA?


nps
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4306 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 everyone,

 

I purchased an external hard drive with a 5-year manufacturer's warranty from an online supplier on 6th January, at a cost of around £150, which I paid for with a credit card, which continually overheated and failed after about an hours usage but would work again after being unplugged and allowed to cool. I contacted the supplier when it broke down entirely in March and was told that all they could do was arrange a replacement with the manufacturer under the warranty. I filled in an online returns request on their website and they arranged its replacement with a reconditioned unit to be sent directly to my address (but in their name) once I had sent the original back to the manufacturer. This cost me £8.25 in postage. This was before I was aware of my statutory rights.

 

The 5-year warranty on the replacement appears to have been limited to November 2013, probably because the replacement was ordered by the retailer, who must have received the original in November 2008 before selling it to me in January. The replacement has suffered from exactly the same problems as the original and broke down entirely on the 8th June.

 

I have emailed the retailer today, pointing out that I cannot be expected to send this item for replacement every 2 months (at a cost of around £250 in postage over the duration of the warranty). I also stated that the item is clearly unfit for purpose, due to the overheating and device failure of both units and not of sufficient durability due to both units breaking down entirely within 3 months, as defined in Section 14 of the SoGA 1979 and that I should be entitled to a full refund.

 

Since the problem is due to a fundamental flaw in design (lack of heat dissipation) and it is the product which is unfit for purpose rather than merely the individual units, a repair or another replacement will be of little use to me. I have offered to accept an equivalent alternative product (and to pay the price difference on the one I have suggested) or credit equal to what I originally paid instead of a refund and am awaiting their reply. If they reject these solutions I may even be prepared to make a further offer of accepting an alternative product of lower capacity which is equivalent in price to the price the original product is selling for at the moment.

 

I hope I am right in assuming that my rights under the SoGA 1979 are not diminished because of the replacement, since this was arranged by the retailer, as evidenced by the aforementioned problem with the warranty period. I would appreciate some advice on how I would best proceed if they are only prepared to arrange another replacement at my expense.

 

As it is still under 6 months since I bought the original unit, am I within my rights to reject the replacement unit and demand a full refund (including the £8.25 postage I should not have had to pay for the replacement?

 

Might I be better off trying to claim the money back from my credit card company under Section 75 of the CCA 1974, since the item cost over £100 and is this likely to be affected by the replacement of the item or the time elapsed since the purchase?

 

If I make a claim against the retailer using MCOL or attempt to reclaim the money from my credit card company, do I need to have sent the item back to the retailer first?

 

I would be very grateful to hear any advice on this matter as I will need to send a formal letter to the retailer ASAP, since it will be 6 months after the initial purchase on 6th July and I will need to allow time for them to reply etc. Thanks in advance...

 

nps

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 6 months doesn't matter - what does is that a replacement has failed with the same fault so you're entitled to at least a partial refund. They really need to repair or replace before a refund is operable anyway, so by accepting the replacement (provided this was through them) you have lost no soga rights.

 

I'd ask them for a refund, under the law (because this is independent from any warranty entitlement) and see what they say. You seem to be largely aware of what your rights are.

 

Wouldn't touch the CCA until you've exhausted all possibilities with the retailer.

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I know it's been a long time but just wanted to add how it ended and the details of the company (which I originally omitted) for anyone else having problems with them. I forgot to do this at the time (haven't been back here in a while).

 

It was LambdaTek and the drive was a Seagate Freeagent Xtreme [sT315005FPD2E3-RK]. After explaining the situation (and the law) to them, as outlined above, I received the standard 'return for replacement' email from Seagate (forwarded to me by LambdaTek). When I reiterated my intention to obtain a refund, not a replacement, pointed out that my address had changed (which would prevent them forcing a replacement on me against my wishes) and asked them to take into account the £16.50 I'd had to pay in postage for the returns, in my refund, I got the following reply:

 

Dear Mr _____

 

Please return the drive with all the accessories that originally came with it. Please note that both returns were logged outside the dead on arrival period which is 28 days from receipt and therefore we may not be able to refund the postage.

 

However on this occasion and to avoid you any further troubles with the product we have requested Seagate to direct the replacement unit to our office instead so we can refund you for the order.

 

I hope this would be a satisfactory resolution for this matter

 

 

Best Regards

 

Soultan

The LambdaTek Customer Services

Office phone : 01865 791055 / Fax : 01865 791057

 

Not only did they refuse to repay the £16.50 postage I paid to return both drives to Seagate on their behalf; they also failed to refund the postage of £8.62 I paid for the shipping of the original item; and withheld the 'refund' until they received the replacement drive from Seagate, despite confirmation by Seagate of receipt of the faulty drive from me and subsequent notification of the shipping of their replacement. The promised 'refund' never actually happened either - they gave me a credit note for the price of the drive only (£158.31).

 

Despite the obvious legal issues with their behaviour and the principle of the thing, because I needed a replacement drive in a hurry (and needed to use those funds for the purchase), I swallowed the loss of the £25.12 and ordered an alternative drive from them for £157.01, although having to pay the excess of £7.32 towards the £8.62 postage added insult to injury. On the upside: the Buffalo Linkstation Live I got as a replacement is excellent and still going strong 3 years later. I have since bought several more of them from other retailers but have never dealt with LambdaTek again (and never will).

 

It is some comfort to me that LambdaTek have since gone from being among the cheapest sources of components on the internet to almost total obscurity (they rarely even show up in price comparisons these days and are always outpriced): I like to think that this must be due to a massive drop in volume because of their appalling attitude and business practices, resulting in many other buyers voting with their feet.

 

Anyway, for those with similar problems: what this episode taught me is that I would have been much better off going down the CCA route with the card provider - they would have had to refund the whole sum I originally paid (£158.31 + £8.62 postage); this would have been restored to the card account immediately; and LambdaTek would have been responsible for recovering the drive from me at their own expense. I would have saved an additional £16.87, been saved the long delay and been free to order my replacement from wherever I chose (probably saving an additional £8.25 by getting free postage elsewhere). The card provider would have been likely to take a more robust approach with LambdaTek in ensuring they recovered the original payment in full (which I assume is why LambdaTek offer bonus credit towards future purchases for paying with a debit card instead of a credit card). The fact that LambdaTek offer incentives to those willing to forfeit their chargeback rights should ring alarm bells....

 

My advice: pay with a credit card whenever you can and make full use of those chargeback rights whenever appropriate (especially with those idiot retailers who will try to claim the SoGA is only good for 28 days - there are lots of them out there, some big ones among them). It's what I've done ever since then. Oh - and avoid Seagate external hard drives like the plague...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's been a long time but just wanted to add how it ended and the details of the company (which I originally omitted) for anyone else having problems with them. I forgot to do this at the time (haven't been back here in a while).

 

It was LambdaTek and the drive was a Seagate Freeagent Xtreme [sT315005FPD2E3-RK]. After explaining the situation (and the law) to them, as outlined above, I received the standard 'return for replacement' email from Seagate (forwarded to me by LambdaTek). When I reiterated my intention to obtain a refund, not a replacement, pointed out that my address had changed (which would prevent them forcing a replacement on me against my wishes) and asked them to take into account the £16.50 I'd had to pay in postage for the returns, in my refund, I got the following reply:

 

 

 

Not only did they refuse to repay the £16.50 postage I paid to return both drives to Seagate on their behalf; they also failed to refund the postage of £8.62 I paid for the shipping of the original item; and withheld the 'refund' until they received the replacement drive from Seagate, despite confirmation by Seagate of receipt of the faulty drive from me and subsequent notification of the shipping of their replacement. The promised 'refund' never actually happened either - they gave me a credit note for the price of the drive only (£158.31).

 

Despite the obvious legal issues with their behaviour and the principle of the thing, because I needed a replacement drive in a hurry (and needed to use those funds for the purchase), I swallowed the loss of the £25.12 and ordered an alternative drive from them for £157.01, although having to pay the excess of £7.32 towards the £8.62 postage added insult to injury. On the upside: the Buffalo Linkstation Live I got as a replacement is excellent and still going strong 3 years later. I have since bought several more of them from other retailers but have never dealt with LambdaTek again (and never will).

 

It is some comfort to me that LambdaTek have since gone from being among the cheapest sources of components on the internet to almost total obscurity (they rarely even show up in price comparisons these days and are always outpriced): I like to think that this must be due to a massive drop in volume because of their appalling attitude and business practices, resulting in many other buyers voting with their feet.

 

Anyway, for those with similar problems: what this episode taught me is that I would have been much better off going down the CCA route with the card provider - they would have had to refund the whole sum I originally paid (£158.31 + £8.62 postage); this would have been restored to the card account immediately; and LambdaTek would have been responsible for recovering the drive from me at their own expense. I would have saved an additional £16.87, been saved the long delay and been free to order my replacement from wherever I chose (probably saving an additional £8.25 by getting free postage elsewhere). The card provider would have been likely to take a more robust approach with LambdaTek in ensuring they recovered the original payment in full (which I assume is why LambdaTek offer bonus credit towards future purchases for paying with a debit card instead of a credit card). The fact that LambdaTek offer incentives to those willing to forfeit their chargeback rights should ring alarm bells....

 

My advice: pay with a credit card whenever you can and make full use of those chargeback rights whenever appropriate (especially with those idiot retailers who will try to claim the SoGA is only good for 28 days - there are lots of them out there, some big ones among them). It's what I've done ever since then. Oh - and avoid Seagate external hard drives like the plague...

 

Why did you settle for a credit note? You are (i believe, and will be corrected if I am wrong) entitled to refund of the same as you paid (i.e. actual currency, not a credit note).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...