Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update to this case as I’ve not been on in a while.    I am still awaiting a charging decision in the case. The two police officers involved have said their personal belief is a section 47 ABH charge is the most likely outcome but this isn’t a sure thing of course.    The EA certificate from the issuing court has now lapsed. The court have refused to recertify him until they’ve had a hearing in to the case, and the district judge has issued orders to surrender all evidence, footage, photos etc.    I have done so promptly.    the EA, not so much . Equita have claimed they cannot provide his bodycam footage as the camera he was wearing is the EA personal one not one of theirs.   the EA has claimed he has asked Equita and the police for the footage as he claims he doesn’t have it.    the police have confirmed they didn’t seize his camera and they don’t have it.    so they are basically pointing the finger at each other all the while failing to comply with the district judges order to provide all evidence they intend to rely on at the rescheduled hearing.    The district judge has stated the hearing for his certification will NOT be the hearing for my complaint as there is no charge as of yet, and just as to whether he should be recertified or not.    I’m not 100% on why that can’t be done at the time, but I’m not about to question a judge…..      
    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
  • 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

Sofaworks false advertising and faulty goods


milyne65
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2885 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 there,

 

Today, I have received an answer back from the Furniture Ombudsman and my claim against Sofaworks was not upheld, which obviously is very disappointing. I am now left with a 2-seater sofa and a footstool which I hardly use as such.

 

I have taken up to have one cushion on the floor (as then it doesn't sag as much as when it is on the sofa springs - the floor providing a harder and more supportive base) and leave the other cushion to provide lower back support. Imagine!!!! Hence, don't really have any use for the footstool.

 

Anyway, I am uncertain as to how the Ombudsman came to their decision. Supposedly they have written to not only the retailer, but also to the manufacturer, and surprise, surprise both would have defended their products, saying that there is nothing wrong with them.

 

I am left rather confused, upset and downright unfairly treated. The 1st letter from the Ombudsman says that ""a conciliation officer will take a detailed look into your [my] complaint and contact you with our initial opinion": this did not happen. They also say "We aim to come to a fair conclusion so it is necessary for us to gather evidence from both parties to the dispute". All the evidence they have "gathered" from me was the application form I have sent at the beginning of October. I have not been visited by anyone to check the furniture for themselves before they"come to a fair conclusion".

 

I had physio sessions for my back and using that sofa (even for short periods) only seemed to have made things worse.

 

I am unsure as to what to do next. Any idea? At I am at my wits end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi milyne65

 

Welcome to CAG

 

You've started off with what the Ombudsman has says, no doubt quite a bit happened before that. If you could start with when and where you purchased the furniture? How you paid for it? The problems you've had with the furniture? Your communications with the retailer? Any communications with the manufacturer? etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi milyne65

 

Welcome to CAG

 

You've started off with what the Onbudsman has says, no doubt quite a bit happened before that. If you could start with when and where you purchased the furniture? How you paid for it? The problems you've had with the furniture? Your communications with the retailer? Any communications with the manufacturer? etc.

 

Thanks for getting back to me so rapidly. I have been trying other avenues in the meantime. Still awaiting to hear from them.

 

I really would like this to be over and done with. My back is killing me.

 

On 26/07/14, I purchase a sofa and a footstool for £649 and £279 respectively, which was delivered on 13/09/14 (one week later than the given date).

After trying a few, and on the recommendation of the shop assistant, I ended up choosing this particular sofa - the Prairie model.

 

All paid for by the delivery date. I've made 2 payments (an initial deposit, then reminder at the delivery).

 

To cut a long story short, as I am sick and tired of regurgitating that story. The product is not as described, contrary to Sofaworks advertising the sofa as providing “brilliant support”, it does not such thing. Where my lower back should rest against the lumbar part of the cushion, it is positioned in the gap between the back cushion and the seat cushion. Therefore, not providing a much needed support. Prior to the delivery of the current sofa, I sat/rested on a quilt on the floor for about 3-4 mths and was rather eager to get another sofa asap.

 

Mr Jason Tyldesley

Cc: Complaint Dept.

Sofaworks

Golborne Point

Ashton Road

Golborne

WA3 3UL

 

 

"Dear Mr Tyldesley and Customer service,

 

Re: 1530793

 

 

I have sent 2 emails to Sofaworks on the delivery day, ie Saturday 13/09/2014, to raise the following issues:

 

· That within 5 mn of the time when the delivery men left, I have noticed a small damaged area (see photo attached) by the right foot (facing the sofa), which seems to contradict the claim on your website that “Natural leather throughout, Sofaworks do not use imitation leather or PVC”.

· That contrary to what I had experienced and been told in the shop, the sofa provides “Superb comfort, excellent shape and brilliant support”. That it does not do, which I have notified Sofaworks on with a note left on the re-delivery invoice handed to me by the delivery men. On that note, I mentioned that the seats tend to sink in and are not as firm as those of the showroom.

 

In the interest of fairness, I would like to say that the service in the shop is good. The shop assistant was polite and helpful; that the sofa does look good (apart from that small damaged area).

 

However, it goes downhill from thereon in terms of customer service. Once the sale has been assured and the good paid for, it is a totally different story. As mentioned above, I have emailed Sofaworks on Saturday, no one has bothered to get in touch via phone or email. Today, Tuesday 16/09/2014, I finally picked up the phone to voice my concerns.

 

Not unusually, I was asked to call another number, which I did, not before being told to read my contract, that no refund is possible. I have a rather simple solution to this issue, in the first instance, why don’t Sofaworks ensure that they do not make false statements; that they ensure that their products is of the quality that they purpot them to be; that they use quality products/materials to build their furniture (ie fillings and springs that provide the right amount of support, leather if the product is supposed to be as opposed to fake leather, that “Solid wooden feet matched to the design” be in solid wood –as it stands 2/4 are in some wood and 2/4 are in plastic, that of the stool are all “solid” plastic etc….). Trying to cut corners is a no win situations, customers get irritated, which ensues a lengthy claim, then they talk around them of their bad experience (not the best type of advertising).

 

I have been told over the phone today, that I will receive the visit of a manager on Thursday 18/09/2014 between 8-9am; that I will receive a phone call the evening before (after 6pm) to confirm the visit and the time of the visit. I did mention that: 1) I would not take time off to deal with issue, 2) I have to leave for work soon after 9am.

 

Should the above mentioned issues not be fully satisfactorily resolved by Friday 26th September 2014, I will not hesitate to log a complaint with a consumer action group, and as a last resort I will go to the Furniture Ombudsman.

 

My consumer rights states that :

1. The good must be fit for purpose

This is what is on your own website and what I was told at the point of selling, having made it clear that it was an essential requirement for me to purchase this particular item, “Superb comfort, excellent shape and brilliant support”,

2. Be of satisfactory appearance and finish

As mentioned in my emails (x2) dated 13/09/2014, small damaged area (see photo attached),

3. Be free of minor defects

See both points above 1) and 2),

4. Be safe of use

Not according to the lower back pain experienced as soon as I seat in this sofa (writing this email, I am in the standing position)

 

So far, it is a very disappointing experience, after waiting for the sofa and having the delivery postponed by a week, I was not expecting this. I was expecting being able to come home and relax in a comfortable sofa. There is enough source of stress in life and can do without this one."

 

 

Furthermore, I have sent my complaint to the Furniture Ombudsman, only for them to rule in favour of the retailer, due to lack of evidence. I am unsure as to how I can convey the lack of support with a picture. Though I did attempt to send a video, but it was readable by the Ombudsman system.

 

In a letter addressed to me by the FO, it stipulates that “our case officers will look at the history of the problem, and, if necessary, examine samples. We may give advice to you or the retailer (or to both) to enable the complaint to be resolved quickly and informally. Where this is not possible we will decide whether we need further information from you or the retailer, or if we need to test or inspect your furniture, before we can make an adjudication decision. If we do, we will contact you and explain this to you. In the majority of cases that we deal with, a test or inspection report is not necessary . Where we do consider that an inspection is necessary, an independent expert will contact you to arrange a convenient time to visit you. If you do not wish to have testing or inspection carried out we can make a decision based on the evidence that has been presented so far. Please not however that we will often recommend that testing or an inspection be carried out so that we have sufficient evidence to support a claim and without this we may not be able to support a complaint”.

 

"Dear Miss ....

Thank you for your e-mail and I am sorry that you feel you do not wish to enter into any verbal discussion.

 

As you are aware, the Service Manager who attended your home on Thursday 18th September fully assessed the furniture and confirmed that there were no inherent manufacturing defects with them.

 

Whilst we understand this is not meeting your personal expectations in terms of comfort, we confirm that under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended), you are not entitled to a full refund.

 

We can only therefore confirm that your only options at this time are as discussed during our conversation.

 

We look forward to hearing further from you after you have had the opportunity to consider these.

 

Best regards

Samantha Greenwood

Technical Services Team Manager

Sofaworks"

 

 

The FO has not offered such inspection to me, for some reason. They just based their decision on the evidence from the retailer. When I contested their decision a couple of times, they emailed to let me know that they were closing the case. As simple as that. (copy of emails exchanged attached). I will be able to provide pdf copies to you of the letters next week, as I do not have a scanner in working order at home.

Edited by milyne65
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really would like this to be over and done with. My back is killing me.

 

On 26/07/14, I purchase a sofa and a footstool for £649 and £279 respectively, which was delivered on 13/09/14 (one week later than the given date).

After trying a few, and on the recommendation of the shop assistant, I ended up choosing this particular sofa - the Prairie model.

 

All paid for by the delivery date. I've made 2 payments (an initial deposit, then reminder at the delivery).

 

To cut a long story short, as I am sick and tired of regurgitating that story. The product is not as described, contrary to Sofaworks advertising the sofa as providing “brilliant support”, it does not such thing. Where my lower back should rest against the lumbar part of the cushion, it is positioned in the gap between the back cushion and the seat cushion. Therefore, not providing a much needed support. Prior to the delivery of the current sofa, I sat/rested on a quilt on the floor for about 3-4 mths and was rather eager to get another sofa asap.

 

Mr Jason Tyldesley

Cc: Complaint Dept.

Sofaworks

Golborne Point

Ashton Road

Golborne

WA3 3UL

 

 

"Dear Mr Tyldesley and Customer service,

 

Re: 1530793

 

 

I have sent 2 emails to Sofaworks on the delivery day, ie Saturday 13/09/2014, to raise the following issues:

 

· That within 5 mn of the time when the delivery men left, I have noticed a small damaged area (see photo attached) by the right foot (facing the sofa), which seems to contradict the claim on your website that “Natural leather throughout, Sofaworks do not use imitation leather or PVC”.

· That contrary to what I had experienced and been told in the shop, the sofa provides “Superb comfort, excellent shape and brilliant support”. That it does not do, which I have notified Sofaworks on with a note left on the re-delivery invoice handed to me by the delivery men. On that note, I mentioned that the seats tend to sink in and are not as firm as those of the showroom.

 

In the interest of fairness, I would like to say that the service in the shop is good. The shop assistant was polite and helpful; that the sofa does look good (apart from that small damaged area).

 

However, it goes downhill from thereon in terms of customer service. Once the sale has been assured and the good paid for, it is a totally different story. As mentioned above, I have emailed Sofaworks on Saturday, no one has bothered to get in touch via phone or email. Today, Tuesday 16/09/2014, I finally picked up the phone to voice my concerns.

 

Not unusually, I was asked to call another number, which I did, not before being told to read my contract, that no refund is possible. I have a rather simple solution to this issue, in the first instance, why don’t Sofaworks ensure that they do not make false statements; that they ensure that their products is of the quality that they purpot them to be; that they use quality products/materials to build their furniture (ie fillings and springs that provide the right amount of support, leather if the product is supposed to be as opposed to fake leather, that “Solid wooden feet matched to the design” be in solid wood –as it stands 2/4 are in some wood and 2/4 are in plastic, that of the stool are all “solid” plastic etc….). Trying to cut corners is a no win situations, customers get irritated, which ensues a lengthy claim, then they talk around them of their bad experience (not the best type of advertising).

 

I have been told over the phone today, that I will receive the visit of a manager on Thursday 18/09/2014 between 8-9am; that I will receive a phone call the evening before (after 6pm) to confirm the visit and the time of the visit. I did mention that: 1) I would not take time off to deal with issue, 2) I have to leave for work soon after 9am.

 

Should the above mentioned issues not be fully satisfactorily resolved by Friday 26th September 2014, I will not hesitate to log a complaint with a consumer action group, and as a last resort I will go to the Furniture Ombudsman.

 

My consumer rights states that :

1. The good must be fit for purpose

This is what is on your own website and what I was told at the point of selling, having made it clear that it was an essential requirement for me to purchase this particular item, “Superb comfort, excellent shape and brilliant support”,

2. Be of satisfactory appearance and finish

As mentioned in my emails (x2) dated 13/09/2014, small damaged area (see photo attached),

3. Be free of minor defects

See both points above 1) and 2),

4. Be safe of use

Not according to the lower back pain experienced as soon as I seat in this sofa (writing this email, I am in the standing position)

 

So far, it is a very disappointing experience, after waiting for the sofa and having the delivery postponed by a week, I was not expecting this. I was expecting being able to come home and relax in a comfortable sofa. There is enough source of stress in life and can do without this one."

 

 

Furthermore, I have sent my complaint to the Furniture Ombudsman, only for them to rule in favour of the retailer, due to lack of evidence. I am unsure as to how I can convey the lack of support with a picture. Though I did attempt to send a video, but it was readable by the Ombudsman system.

 

In a letter addressed to me by the FO, it stipulates that “our case officers will look at the history of the problem, and, if necessary, examine samples. We may give advice to you or the retailer (or to both) to enable the complaint to be resolved quickly and informally. Where this is not possible we will decide whether we need further information from you or the retailer, or if we need to test or inspect your furniture, before we can make an adjudication decision. If we do, we will contact you and explain this to you. In the majority of cases that we deal with, a test or inspection report is not necessary . Where we do consider that an inspection is necessary, an independent expert will contact you to arrange a convenient time to visit you. If you do not wish to have testing or inspection carried out we can make a decision based on the evidence that has been presented so far. Please not however that we will often recommend that testing or an inspection be carried out so that we have sufficient evidence to support a claim and without this we may not be able to support a complaint”.

 

"Dear Miss ....

 

Thank you for your e-mail and I am sorry that you feel you do not wish to enter into any verbal discussion.

 

As you are aware, the Service Manager who attended your home on Thursday 18th September fully assessed the furniture and confirmed that there were no inherent manufacturing defects with them.

 

Whilst we understand this is not meeting your personal expectations in terms of comfort, we confirm that under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended), you are not entitled to a full refund.

 

We can only therefore confirm that your only options at this time are as discussed during our conversation.

 

We look forward to hearing further from you after you have had the opportunity to consider these.

 

Best regards

Samantha Greenwood

Technical Services Team Manager

Sofaworks"

 

 

The FO has not offered such inspection to me, for some reason. They just based their decision on the evidence from the retailer. When I contested their decision a couple of times, they emailed to let me know that they were closing the case. As simple as that. (copy of emails exchanged attached). I will be able to provide pdf copies to you of the letters next week, as I do not have a scanner in working order at home.

Edited by milyne65
had to remove some details
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi milyne65

 

Please don't start further threads. Threads merged.

 

You state the following:- 'I've made 2 payments (an initial deposit, then reminder at the delivery)'.

 

How exactly did you pay? Debit Card, Credit Card etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi milyne65

 

Contact your Card Provider, ask to carry out a Chargeback. They will send you forms, fill them in, send them back Recorded Delivery.

 

Put your case to them, send pictures etc. They will make it difficult, but persist. The retailer will no doubt be stubborn.

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/how-do-i-use-chargeback

 

Hi Rebel11,

I've paid with a debit card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rebel11

i vaguely read about this on the CAB site i think. It's just that after the Furniture Ombudsman ruled in favour of the retailer, when I really thought that I had a case, I am more than keen to get this over and done with asap.

So, now out of the small court claim and chargeback, which one is more likely to be advisable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would carry out the Chargeback first, the Court will want to see that you've tried everything to resolve the matter. If the Chargeback goes in your favour, then there is no need to lodge a Court claim.

 

Hi Rebel11

i vaguely read about this on the CAB site i think. It's just that after the Furniture Ombudsman ruled in favour of the retailer, when I really thought that I had a case, I am more than keen to get this over and done with asap.

So, now out of the small court claim and chargeback, which one is more likely to be advisable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutley. When you fill in the forms, keep it short and concise so they can pick out the facts easliy, if they need further information, they will ask.

 

One last thing... for now, at least... I forgot to mention about the delivery cost. I guess it would be fair to include in the chargeback claim, wouldn't it?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi milyne65

 

If Sofaworks are mis-advertising sofa's, i.e.'advertised the sofa as natural leather when in fact it's made of faux leather'.

 

Lodge a complaint with the ASA:-

 

http://www.asa.org.uk/Consumers/What-we-cover.aspx

 

http://www.asa.org.uk/Consumers/How-to-complain.aspx

 

Also lodge a complaint with Trading Standards through CAB:-

 

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/extra/contact.cfm?frmAlias=/contact/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...

hello, yes a technician has inspected the 2 seater, we rang up today as no one had been in contact since the visit, (25th April), to be told that they did not send the report to us as in his opinion there is nothing wrong with it.

We have email the CEO and got a call back, but they are sticking with its ok.

The fault is there is not enough filling in the back cushion, (leather 2 seater) and it does not fill the edges, been told since we got the 3 2 1 suite (13th Jan 2015) to dress it every day, but what they mean is beat the hell out of it, this is not what we expect from a new suite.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

SW cannot refuse to send a copy of the technicians report. Put it in writing, and tell them you want a copy of the technicians report. They can send this either by post, or more recently, they have been sending them via email. Did you get the name of the SW employee who refused to send the report? Always make sure you get the name of whoever you deal with at SW. The excuse you have been given is a common one regarding the stuffing of the cushions. Once you have this report, you can then challenge them with an independent report of your own. Many have had success with their complaints with SW using this route. What is the name of your suite?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good choice !. Have you told your Credit Card provider you are having trouble with SW? Sometimes your CC provider will help regarding the cost of an independent report if you tell them you are challenging SW, they do have a duty of care to you regarding your purchase. However, make sure that the report is done by a company who are not affiliated with the Furniture Ombudsman. That way, it is truly independent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

SW have asked others for £10 for a copy of the report so this is not unusual. Some have ended up paying, while others have not. If you disagree with what SW have told you, you need to see this report. Should you decide to take matters further regarding your complaint with SW, you can add this £10 to the costs you will claim from the company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under filling is a common complaint with SW, and 'dressing' is unlikely to make things better. Have you informed your credit card provided that you have a complaint against SW? Sometimes they can offer to help with an independent report on your sofa. However, getting a copy of your inspection report signed by the technician who has visited you, will show you exactly what is on this report. Do not just take SW's say so as to what the report says.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...