Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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

SOFOLOGY giving me the run-around. Any advice please?***Settled***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1918 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 received leather sofa from Sofology, financed with an Int. free loan from Barclays (Partner Finance)

Hours after delivery, it became obvious that the sofa had manufacturing faults (different cushion front panel heights, and inadequate partly filled cushions to the seating area.

 

  • Raised a complaint (!) and provided photo/video evidence....asked for correction or collection!
  • Initially fobbed off, told there was nothing wrong.
  • Persisted, and 3 weeks later, I appear to be dealing with a senior colleague, instead of the 11 or so 'Tom, Dick and Harriets' that I had encountered in a sequence of email/call centre 'one-off' contacts.

 

I have informed Sofology that I wish to return the sofa, due to it's failings, and also that it fails to match the quality of the original in-store sofa observed at time of ordering. Q- Might this form a 'breach of contract'?

 

I'm not a legal person and don't want the 'Perry Mason' in me to get completely carried away!

 

FWIW I have complained to Barclays, and they have started a Sect 75 complaint....but I've no idea where that might go.

 

However....after essentially ignoring me for over a fortnight....Sofology have perked up a bit when Barclays presented the complaint.

 

Position I'm now in is:

 

Either.....allow Homserve rep. (supposedly independent....really?) to visit, assess and provide an 'honest' report.

Sofolgy's subsequent action, in terms of the 'refund' (to Barclays) and to end the finance agreement will depend on this 'report'

 

OR....as the defects/faults are considered 'un'confirmed, (in spite of Video evidence) they will take back the Sofa, and charge me a 30% (£300+) cancellation fee. Is it correct to consider this as a cancellation.....the item is defective??!

 

Haven't encountered this idea of being charged in order to return a defective item......is that legal?

 

Would appreciate any help from members

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

under the Consumer rights act if a defect appears within the first 30 days then you are entitled to a refund or a repair at your option.

 

Write them a recorded delivery letter and tell them that you are invoking your short-term right to return and that you wants your money back and you want me to collect the sofa immediately.

Send the letter by recorded delivery and by email

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great....thanks for the reply!

 

in an e-mail to 'em yesterday, I included:

"Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 goods you supply must be fit for purpose. As there was a problem with the goods when I bought them, I request that you refund Barclays, and end the agreement between us."

(Hard to know how to phrase the 'refund' bit....is it to me, or to Barclays??)

 

This was totally ignored in earlier replies today.

 

Replies from them seem to indicate that there is now an indecent haste to choose...and choose now!!

The short/sweet 'take it or leave it' email received last was essentially:

(obviously keeping reply impersonal for this forum)

"The options are:

- Cancellation and refund with a 30% charge

- Inspection of furniture

 

Kind Regards,

Xxxxx Xxxxxx

Finance............. Specialist"

 

This can't be right....and I will be following your suggested line of tack. Thankyou!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not entitled to quibble or to levy inspection charges or to apply any administration charges. There has to be a no quibble refund and they have to bear all the costs.

 

You should be warned that this company, Sofology don't seem to be very cooperative when dealing with their customers consumer rights.

 

Stand your ground. I don't know what the value of this sofa is but I'm quite sure that it is well below the small claims limit which means that you can sue them without any worries of having to pay costs in the most unlikely event that you could lose the case.

 

If you are prepared to take a county court action against them, then send them a 14 day letter before claim and tell them that if they don't collect the sofa and refund your money by the end of that 14 days that you will issue a claim in the County Court and without further notice.

 

Only make this threat if you're prepared to carry it through. However County Court procedure at this level is extremely easy and pretty well risk-free. We will help you all the way.

 

We get too many stories about SOFOLOGY. It's good when people stand up to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, where are you getting this "fit for purpose" stuff? The short-term right to reject becomes available simply if there is a defect. There is no mention in the statute as to how serious the defect must be.

 

Stop using this fit for purpose language. You simply give them a hook to try and deny you your rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....Oh...and forgot to say:

 

Received sofa on 6th Nov.....1st complained 16th November.....it's now 7th December.

(been fobbed off essentially for 3 weeks....have kept records/paper-trail though)

 

I did request return and money back as early as 21st Nov

.....now beginning to worry that I've been timed out?

 

Might this present a problem??

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a vague possibility it could present a problem. Straightly speaking you should have asserted your right. However, there is not much at stake and if I were you I would simply go for it. Tell them that you reported the defect within the first 30 days you now giving them 14 days and then you issue.

 

Stop mucking around. Stop being led around by the nose. Take control or else just let it go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "inspector" will say that the sofa is ok because he's paid by sofology.

I had a dreams inspector around who said that a 40% sagging on a 6 month old mattress is normal.

He showed up with a 4 inch ruler to check the sagging and he said there wasn't any.

Then I gave him a 6 foot spirit level and he had to agree that the sagging was there but "only" 40% of the total mattress thickness is apparently normal.

Funnily enough he didn't say that to me, he wrote that in his report.

Threat of court got me the money back faster than the speed of light, so stand your ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you complained within 14 days ..no quibble allowed.

you don't want it

full refund please

 

BPF are equally liable under sec 75.

have you paid anything to them yet?

do you want to keep it or just forget it all happened?

 

if you don't want the thing... pers i'd be telling BCF they are to demand sofology come collect the item and for BCF to cancel the agreement and refund any money you have paid to them back to you. else as BF stated you will issue a court claim against both BCF and sofology within 14 days without further notice.

 

that should get a result pretty quick

 

SF and BCF can argue the 30% charge out between themselves.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks also to king12345 ...and dx100uk for joining in!!

 

I want to get this right....does this work as a body of text as the letter??

 

"With reference to my complaint raised on 16th November, I am invoking my short-term right to return the sofa referenced above.

Your records will show that I have repeatedly requested return of sofa from as early as 18th November, and this has fallen on deaf ears.

I request return of all monies immediately, and also request your immediate collection of said sofa.

Failure to comply within 14 days will result in the issue of a court claim against both Barclays Partner Finance and Sofology"

 

Please be brutal!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter is fine – as long as you mean to go ahead with it.

 

Send the letter by first class recorded post. In the meantime open up an account on moneyclaim online and start reading on this forum about the steps to begin the County Court action.

 

 

Your particulars of claim would be:

 

Claimant purchased a sofa from the defendant cost £XXX, invoice reference XXX

within XX days of delivery of the sofa the claimant became aware of defects and immediately informed the defendant and demanded a refund under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and also that the defendant arrange to collect the sofa.

The defendant has refused to give the refund or to collect the sofa.

The claimant claims £XXX plus interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts act 1984

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would change the first part to "You have ignored my request of refund when I invoked the short term right to return the sofa under the Consumer Regulation Act 2015."

 

How about....

 

"With reference to my complaint raised on 16th November, I am for the final time, requesting a refund, which you have previously ignored, and am invoking my short-term right to return the sofa referenced above, under the Consumer Regulation Act 2015."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaggghh....worrying that I've screwed this up already!!?

 

As I mentioned on Saturday.....I've sent off 2 letters....one to both BPF and Sofology.

These are the first 'hard-copy'/written elements to my claim so far.......prior to that, everything was by e-mail and phone. Have I satisfied 'pre-action protocol'?

 

I know it's a PITA....but was hoping someone might skim the text....and if I've ballsed up...I can start again!

Have I made things complicated by roping together both Sofology and BPF in the same notice of intent?(issue?)

 

The italicised/underlined section is the bit that went to Sofology....BPF got the lot.....it seemed a good idea at the time

 

Text to BPF went :

 

"...........You will be aware of the complaint I raised with BPF on the 22nd Nov against Sofology

 

Sofology appear to have learned of that complaint on Wednesday 5th December, with bullying now taking the place of slow inadequate response, which had been my experience to that point.

 

Find below the letter/email I am sending to Sofology :

 

With reference to my complaint raised on 16th November, I am for the final time, requesting a refund, which you have previously ignored, and am invoking my short-term right to return the sofa referenced above, under the Consumer Regulation Act 2015.

Your records will show that I have repeatedly requested return of sofa from as early as 18th November, and this has fallen on deaf ears.

I request return of all monies immediately, and also request your immediate collection of said sofa.

Failure to comply within 14 days will result in the issue of a County Court claim against both Barclays Partner Finance and Sofology without further notice.

 

I request now that you should demand that Sofology collect the item, and that Barclays Partner Finance cancel the agreement referenced above, and refund payment(s) already made.

 

Failure to comply within 14 days will result in the issue of a County Court claim against both Barclays Partner Finance and Sofology without further notice.........."

 

Just don't want to be pi**ing into the wind right from the start....

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine.

Don't Think that you need a lot of big words and legal jargon, that's not how it works.

I've always advised that the clearer the better so they can't say that it was not understandable.

You spelt it out to them in plain English, that's good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ericsbrother and King12345

 

Email from BPF arrived this morning....not sure how to handle it tbh!

As I mentioned in post #1.....BPF had commenced an 'investigation' to my complaint under sect.75

 

They're looking for more info....here's the gist :

 

In order to investigate your concerns further, we require some additional information.

 

Can you provide me with a timeline of events, including:

• When did you first noticed the problems?

• When did you first notify Sofology?

• Has any remedial work been completed?

• When did they come out to your property?

• What did they do on the visit(s)

• List of outstanding issues as it stands today

• Photographs of the problems as it stands today

• Copy of your sales invoice

 

I'm uncertain whether they've seen my letter before action....which would've arrived today at the latest....and don't want to compromise my position.

 

Question Should I deal directly with BPF and supply info now....or remind them that a letter before action has been sent, and I'm sticking to that route??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Respond to their questions and let them know about the deadline set by your lba.

However, I am not sure if there's a max time for finance companies to deal with section 75.

As far as I know there's no mention in the legislation, so your 14 days should be fine.

Experts in section 75 will surely confirm or correct me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE.....and some clarification needed please!!

 

Contacted by Sofology on Tues. afternoon.

They've received LBA.....and offered to take back sofa, with loss of my £71.90 deposit.

Told them that wasn't acceptable and I was going for 100% refund....as stated in letter.

Was then told I'd be contacted in 48 hours....which has now gone. I assume that they're waiting for my next move?

 

I now have moneyclaim form on screen....and there are a few 'fields' I need to be sure of:

 

Date money became owed to you is this the date I 1st requested refund??

Date you are issuing the claim...???...date of LBA???....todays date???

Claim amount:.....pretty sure that's the full Sales Order amount

Daily rate of interest up to the date of judgment:.....now I'm really stuck...:)

 

 

Also...since there are 2 defendants...Sofology and BPF....does the following statement work??

 

Claimant purchased a sofa from the defendant 1 at cost £XXX, invoice reference XXX, this being financed by Defendant 2.

 

On 1st day of delivery of the sofa the claimant became aware of defects and after 10 days, informed the defendant 1, and demanded a refund under the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 and also that the defendant 1 arrange to collect the sofa.

The defendant 1 has refused to give the refund or to collect the sofa. ( Where does defendant 2 come in??...feels a bit shaky.)

The claimant claims £XXX plus interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts act 1984

 

I'm wondering if it might be best just to stick to the one defendant (Sofology)...as BPF are currently (supposedly) doing a sect 75 investigation on my behalf?....Oh what a tangled web!!!!

Just want to get this spot on before I push the button!

Edited by WontGetFooledAgain
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...