Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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 Buy It Now and the Distance Selling Regulations


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5145 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

I know the Distance Selling Regulations apply to Buy It Now items on eBay, but is that just for business sellers, or are all BIN sales covered.

 

I recently bought a large poster frame from an eBay seller using Buy It Now, but it only arrived yesterday, a week after the event I needed it for. I bought it just over 2 weeks ago, but from the postmark it seems it was only posted this last Monday, over a week after I bought it. (The packaging was also apalling - just a single layer of thin bubble-wrap, and part of it isn't even covered by the bubble-wrap.

 

The seller stated that items would be posted within 2 days, and stated "no returns", but from what I've read on the eBay help pages, they can't actually say that under the DSR.

 

I'm not quite sure where I stand on this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only applies to business. However, don't just limit your attention to whether or not they are an eBay trader. Check the buying/selling history of the seller. It will soon be clear whether they are trading or they are just private sellers.

 

If you are going to sue them then print out their feedback history to show a court that they are actually traders.

Also, in an eBay dispute, point out to eBay that they are trading even though they have not informed eBay

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it damaged?

It doesn't appear to be damaged (though I haven't actually taken the bubble wrap off).

 

Only applies to business. However, don't just limit your attention to whether or not they are an ebay trader. Check the buying/selling history of the seller. It will soon be clear whether they are trading or they are just private sellers.

 

If you are going to sue them then print out their feedback history to show a court that they are actually traders.

Also, in an eBay dispute, point out to eBay that they are trading even though they have not informed eBay

 

Thanks for the tip. I suspect it is a trader. The listing said there were more than 10 available, and although they don't have much feedback, for a couple it's the same item that the rating's been left for. Also, for the item I bought, the item description clearly states "sale is for ONE unit although we have many in stock", which isn't the kind of thing a private seller would put!

 

I guess I can try contacting the seller and see if they'll accept a return (mentioning that I suspect they're a business) and give them the opportunity to play nice before I leave a negative rating or contact eBay. With a feedback score of only 15 I guess a negative feedback would rather impact on their feedback reputation! I guess I really should have checked the listing out more thoroughly before buying! I've been using eBay for 7 years, so it's not as though I don't know what to look out for! I've just been lucky in the past though that I've had no problems with sellers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes they only apply to businesses, and it would seem that you bought from a business. The dsrs actually say acting in a 'professional capacity' and these chaps seem to fit the bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I donlt make the same connection Kraken does. Selling items in quantity is no confirmation that he is a trader, the only thing that should guide you is to look at the sellers eBay profile. Is he REGISTERED as a business trader? If so, DSR will apply. If not, it will not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great for the OFT. How do they propose the OP proves this? In an eBay trader (and registered as such) it is a slam-dunk. Otherwise, he'll be whistling in the wind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not being registered as an ebay trader does not preclude the seller from acting in a commercial or professional capacity. The DSRs could still apply. But, as you state, showing this could be particularly difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is actually quite difficult to stop eBay 'upgrading' your account from private to business. If the amount of sales starts to peak, you get targeted, so if you reach sales of over £1000pa, then they are likely to switch you.

 

So if eBay has the seller as private, he probably doesn't have the sales to justify it, with the result making the leap to a business/DSR/SoGA protection ultimately fail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it might be troublesome to prove, but so is alot of stuff. there is a fair bit of precedent in the area, especially from the motor trade. Generally the courts look at the frequency and type of transactions to determine if a seller is a business or not. What ebay, or the seller says is fairly irrelevant.

 

"supplier means any person who is acting in a commercial or professional capacity" is actually a quote from the dsrs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...