Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Bankfodder, I don't understand why you think that I am trying to cheat them. It is in the best interest of the landlord to have a tenant occupying the property rather than having it vacant. But having it vacant is better than having a 'bad' tenant - there are plenty of horror stories. As a landlord, you don't have a lot to rely on before you let some occupy the property so how the tenant behaves leading up to signing the agreement is important.    I have had other issues with the agent which I didn't want to elaborate here that led me to terminate the contract as soon as I rejected this tenant. But ultimately the law is law and if my interpretation regarding the 2013 Regulation is correct, this should be straightforward and we don't even need to rely on the other clauses. I'll see how it goes.
    • Just because criteria won't agreed in writing, doesn't mean that there are criteria and they are not to be implied into the contract. As I've said, you have to give your contracting partner reasonable opportunity to complete their side of the bargain. If you employ a builder to build a wall and they start work, then you have to give them a reasonable opportunity to complete. Here you have an agent who apparently has found a tenant and the tenant has satisfied the reference requirements. You keep on saying that they were transparent – but you haven't told us what that means and the most important thing is that you might have to explain that to a judge. I'm afraid so far the impression one gets is that you are simply trying to escape a commitment – even if it is for the best of reasons. I see that you disagree with me. Well that's fine. It's not me that decides the outcome. I think that you are in difficult terrain in respect of your first grounds of objecting. I think that the unfair terms provisions are far more useful to you and are likely to have some success. Once again, your only answer to this is that a tenancy contract haven't actually been signed. Once again I say to you that all of the practical conditions for the contract to go ahead had been satisfied but on your hunch you then prevented the agent from completing their side of the bargain. I think that you are going to have to find a reasonable settlement. I don't think it will be very much – but you are certainly going to have to find a reasonable settlement – and if the agent objected, as well they might, at least you can then demonstrate to a court that you at least have attempted to act fairly and it is simply the agent who is being unfair. I don't think it would be too good for you if a judge came to the conclusion that the agent was trying to cheat you – but you also were trying to cheat them, for whatever reason. I don't thing I can say anything more  
    • Well I think it would be prudent to check them. I found several warranty details for your make of laptop but not UK. Surprisingly, they only say that they will repair defective parts and there is nothing as to what happens if the unit is not repairable. I suppose that being Acer, they have access to all the parts needed – in principle – and they reckon they can repair anything. Double check and see if you can get access to the warranty. Also, you need to decide whether you are prepared to issue a small claim. If you never done it before then read around this forum about how to take a small claim in the County Court. It's quite straightforward but you need to know the steps in advance. Once again, don't expect this to be sorted out by 18 December. I expect that you won't even have it sorted out by February – unless they suddenly react once they receive the court papers and move themselves. Of course you could say that by February the thing will be repaired anyway – but actually you don't know that. It could go on very much longer and at the moment I think you are being led around by the nose
    • As far as I remember and by looking at the receipt, it was already included in the price of the laptop.    Regarding the terms and conditions, I have no idea where to look for them. I might ask my mum to see if there is a mini book that came with the laptop and might contain the terms and conditions
    • But there were exceptional circumstance involved, they must count for something 
  • Our picks

Poorly kitten sold.


Recommended Posts

Quote

Hi, we bought a kitten in June, he was 9 weeks old and all we were told is that he was the runt of the litter and very small but as long as he gained enough weight vet said he was allowed to be rehomed. Within 3 days of bringing him home he was seen at the vets, he had chronic diarrhoea, mites and faeces in his ears and hadn't been wormed and was rapidly losing weight. We had a lot of vet consultations for antibiotics, probiotic pastes, other treatment, faecal tests etc. He was on a vet advised gastro intestinal diet as we had no idea what was causing the chronic diarrhoea. After another decline this week and still only weigh 800g at 4.5 months the vet told us his stomach felt like mush and a change in colour of his eyes indicated a liver problem. We therefore had to have him put to sleep on Monday. Breeder said there was nothing wrong before he left their home but our vet agreed that even with specialised diets and medication that he would of been very poorly when born. Even with specialist treatment costing thousands he would of had a very short life. We paid £200 for him and including his now cremation our bills have cost over £1000 in just a couple of months as nothing was covered under his insurance due to it being a 'pre existing condition.' 

I just want to ask where I stand looking at a small claims court. Of course most importantly I will report her in the hope she won't breed again but I also want to enquire whether it would be worth pushing for compensation for damages, vet bills and purchase price etc.

 

 

Hi,

we bought a kitten in June, he was 9 weeks old and all we were told is that he was the runt of the litter and very small but as long as he gained enough weight vet said he was allowed to be rehomed.

 

Within 3 days of bringing him home he was seen at the vets, he had chronic diarrhoea, mites and faeces in his ears and hadn't been wormed and was rapidly losing weight.

We had a lot of vet consultations for antibiotics, probiotic pastes, other treatment, faecal tests etc. He was on a vet advised gastro intestinal diet as we had no idea what was causing the chronic diarrhoea.

 

After another decline this week and still only weigh 800g at 4.5 months the vet told us his stomach felt like mush and a change in colour of his eyes indicated a liver problem. We therefore had to have him put to sleep on Monday.

 

Breeder said there was nothing wrong before he left their home but our vet agreed that even with specialised diets and medication that he would of been very poorly when born.

Even with specialist treatment costing thousands he would of had a very short life.

 

We paid £200 for him and including his now cremation our bills have cost over £1000 in just a couple of months as nothing was covered under his insurance due to it being a 'pre existing condition.' 

 

Any help would be appreciated as we have some devastated children! 

 

Many Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please could you not post in solid blocks of text. It makes it very difficult to follow. It will help enormously if you can post with proper spacing and punctuation.

If you can get an independent assessment which confirms that this is a pre-existing condition and the kitten should not have been sold to you in this condition then I would say that you can certainly recover the purchase price but also any reasonably foreseeable losses.

It seems to me that any breeder would realise that one somebody purchases an animal, they effectively make a commitment to it and to its well-being and so if the costs they incur are reasonable and have become necessary because of an undisclosed pre-existing condition then these would be recoverable.

Have you had any exchange with the breeder

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry this has happened to you.  It is heartbreaking and especially difficult when there are children involved.

Was this kitten a particular breed?  No proper 'breeder' can sell a kitten until a week after it has had a full set of vaccinations which means they have to be 13 weeks old at a minimum.  Do you have anything in writing (email maybe) where the seller told you the kitten had been seen by a vet and cleared for sale?  I suspect this may not be true and if so there was clear misrepresentation.  Nine weeks is the normal age for the first of two vaccinations which make up the full course so maybe the kitten had been seen by a vet.  Were you given a vaccination certificate showing one dose given and a date around three weeks later for another?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To the day he died, he still wasn't vaccinated because his tummy was too delicate and he was too poorly x

He was a Turkish Angora x

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know a lot about this kind of thing – but in terms of consumer rights, all the evidence seems to show that you bought an item which was defective to the extent that the entire purpose of the contract has been undermined.

Additionally, you are within the six months which is contemplated by the consumer rights act and therefore you are entitled to a repair or a refund. Clearly no repair as possible so you are entitled to a refund. I will also say that all of your associated losses which have been reasonably incurred would also be recoverable.
You should obtain a written statement from your vet which expresses an opinion that the item was was already suffering from this defect before you purchased it. If you can get a second opinion which corroborates the first then so much the better.

Please put together a list of all of the expenses which you have incurred and post them up here.

We will then help you with the next step against this breeder

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ZCH5714 said:

To the day he died, he still wasn't vaccinated because his tummy was too delicate and he was too poorly x

 

16 hours ago, ZCH5714 said:

we were told is that he was the runt of the litter and very small but as long as he gained enough weight vet said he was allowed to be rehomed.

No vet would say a kitten is fit to be rehomed if it isn't fit enough to be vaccinated.  I know I'm pushing this point and it's because this could be considered a 'private' sale and therefore deliberate misrepresentation could (on top of everything BF has said) be important if you have to take it further.  I'm afraid there's every chance that will be the case because this has all the hallmarks of a backyard breeder who doesn't care.

 

This cannot have been a registered pedigree kitten, what paperwork were you given?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had assumed that this was a breeder who was trading rather than a private sale

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BankFodder said:

I had assumed that this was a breeder who was trading rather than a private sale

There’s precious little doubt in my mind this is someone producing kittens to make money.  The irony is that because they are doing so in such a callous and irresponsible manner there may be little evidence.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...