Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you all for your input so far. I have now received a letter back from my CPR 31.14 stating 'CPR 31.14 is not relevant to small claims matter, pursuant to cpr 27.2......we are under no obligation to disclose the documentation at this stage.' I assume this response is expected?   I have reworded my defence and made it more succinct, I'm not sure what else I could add?   1. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.   2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. However, the defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of PoFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charges.   3. Signage at the site is not sufficient. A sign is present on the left hand side of the entrance, away from the driver, and therefore cannot be easily read by the driver of a passing vehicle. On closer inspection this sign states ’Refer to the full Terms & Conditions signs located throughout the car park’. Signs are located so that information is often obscured by other parked cars and is difficult to read. These signs state ‘Entry to or use of this privately operated and managed car park is subject to the current terms and conditions of vehicle control services ltd. Motorists/persons utilising this car park hereby accept in full the terms and conditions.’ Therefore, the driver is deemed to have agreed to the terms and conditions by having entered the car park before knowing what those terms and conditions are. The elements of offer, acceptance and consideration both ways have therefore not been satisfied and so no contract can exist.   4. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4 not with reference to the judgement in parking eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the civil procedure rules 1998    In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. 
    • On side note: I have notice that many people without the skills to argue their point, accuse others of being rude, racist, sexist, homophobic etc. I.E. Excuse me, i don't have a receipt for this refund, but i have my bank statement,  can i get a refund? -No, no receipt no refund - But your policy and the law says "proof of purchase" not "receipt " - You're rude/racist/homophobic, you must leave now or i call security.    I see this happening day in day out. Even kids do it, they're very quick at gaining a crowd's attention by shouting "racist/homophobic" so they can feel they've won the argument.  Sad.  
    • The advice is: make a complaint and get a refund. Then make another complaint about the inspectors attitude if you want, but changing the world is something that it's not going to happen, surely not for an excess fare. Inspectors are given discretion and unfortunately some of them take this as a sign of power over other people. It's impossible to sack all people who have a little position of power and employ more, hence the complaint system.  That's life and as .much as everyone of us want to improve it, it's an impossible task, so don't waste your time and brain on it. Just accept that there are things you can't change.  Get your refund, get your apology, then move on. That's my advice.
    • Hi.   I've removed part of the account number to keep this anonymous for you.   Have npower done what the ombudsman said?   HB
  • Our picks

SuperStretch

BHS refuse to exchange

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1580 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

My partner ordered some bridesmaid dresses from an in-store catalogue,

yesterday she went to collect the dresses which were delivered to store.

 

 

One arriving home and opening the box she noticed she has been sent the wrong colour.

BHS have admitted fault on this and have asked her to return them.

 

However they are refusing to exchange only refund.

The dresses were 20% off when she ordered,

they say they will honour this but only if she re-orders today.

 

 

Considering the cost of the dresses she does not want to re-order until she has received her refund.

 

Does anyone have any advice?

 

 

Is there any case for making them exchange considering it is their fault?

 

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, if they have messed up once, then why give them a second chance?

 

I would return the items, get the refund, and then vote with my feet and go elsewhere, they're trying to make you dance to their tune,

well I wouldn't let them make demands on me as it is their mistake.

 

Classic arrogance if you ask me!


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly its their choice refund/replace/repair

 

 

 

 

 

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sadly its their choice refund/replace/repair

 

 

 

 

 

 

dx

 

How so?

The OP notes they sent the wrong colour.

 

So, the correct colour had been stated as part of the order, and became part of a "sale by description".

 

They weren't as described, so OP is entitled to a refund.

 

On what basis do you feel the retailer is entitled to repair them?

 

Even if the retailer had the right to "repair", and I doubt they do for the reason stated ; How exactly do you feel the retailer could "repair" them?? Dying them?

 

The OP can insist on a refund.

 

However, the OP wants to insist on an exchange. I'm not sure they can insist on an exchange.

What they could do is ask for an exchange, and if the retailer declines note that they will instead:

a) get the refund

b) re-order (either with the retailer, or elsewhere, at the best price they can obtain, so as to "mitigate their loss"), THEN

c) go after the retailer for their loss (if they end up paying more, having lost the 20% discount), for "loss of bargain"

 

The refund would be under the Sale of goods (and Supply if Services) Legislation, with the recovery of the extra paid out as an action for damages for breach of contract (in order to "(as far as possible), put the claimant in the position they would have been in, had the contract been completed"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RTFQ, they ARE giving the OP a refund, what they decline to do is an exchange.


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RTFQ, they ARE giving the OP a refund, what they decline to do is an exchange.

 

Absolutely.

 

1) talk of a repair is a "red herring"

 

2) The OP can't make them do the exchange, but can still end up paying only the original price by recovering any extra cost. See my post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe DX was just making a general statement.

They either have the choice to repair, replace, or refund, and this time they have gone with refund.

 

Hopefully the OP will come back and let us know what they decided, hopefully taking the refund and kicking these in to touch and going elsewhere...


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do believe DX was just making a general statement.

They either have the choice to repair, replace, or refund, and this time they have gone with refund.

 

Hopefully the OP will come back and let us know what they decided, hopefully taking the refund and kicking these in to touch and going elsewhere...

 

The general statement "they" (meaning the retailer) "have the choice to either repair, replace, or refund" is incorrect.

 

If the item was sold by description (e.g. "I want that particular colour"), then if it doesn't meet that description, the purchaser doesn't have to accept repair or exchange. The purchaser can insist on a refund, and doesn't have to accept repair or replacement.

 

As it happens, here the purchaser wants an exchange. They wouldn't have to accept an exchange if they didn't want it, but COULD chose to, IF the retailer offered it.

 

OP can force the retailer to refund, but can't force them to exchange. If the refund later leaves the OP out of pocket for buying goods to the original specification elsewhere, they have grounds for an action to recover their (mitigated!) losses due to breach of contract.

 

Retailer can't make the OP accept repair (or for that matter exchange).

 

If the retailer chose to agree an exchange, OP can choose to accept it, if it is what they want. Retailer doesn't have to offer an exchange if they don't want to, purchaser doesn't have to accept it IF it is offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:sleep:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...