Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @dx100uk being the stresser that I am, I’ve tried to get as many viewpoints as I can. I’m pretty dismayed with one I’ve received on Reddit, whereby someone thought I had a good case, but have now backtracked, and gave some Argos terms and conditions which have me worried.    They firstly wrote to my query…  OP, this is a straightforward cancellation under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, which replaced the Distance Selling Regulations. That you picked it up from an Argos store is irrelevant - it was a distance contract because you didn't get to inspect the goods before making the purchase. As your parents cancelled the contract within 14 days of taking possession of the item, by bringing it back to the shop, they do not need to prove that there is anything wrong with it at all. The 14-day window for a refund technically started on the day you (tried) to return it. However, as it is on you to show that you cancelled it, I suggest you do so in writing to Argos. Please also complain to trading standards (you must use the Citizens Advice Bureau to do this now) about Argos's behaviour - we see this problem here on a regular basis.     he has then since came back with this…   In the Regulations, reg 5 provides that "distance contract" means: a contract concluded between a trader and a consumer under an organised distance sales or service-provision scheme without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, with the exclusive use of one or more means of distance communication up to and including the time at which the contract is concluded; Argos's terms and conditions say that the contract is not concluded until the goods which you have already paid for have been collected (clause 2.3). Depending on how "collected" is interpreted, this may not be a distance contract after all, because the contract was not "concluded between a trader and a consumer ... without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer," and there was not "the exclusive use of one or more means of distance communication up to and including the time at which the contract is concluded". So Argos's position would be that you could have arrived at the front counter, had the iPhone brought to you, inspected it, and decided not to take it. That would have meant that the order was not "collected", so the contract was not concluded - there was no contract. At the point you decide to accept the iPhone, the item is "collected" and the contract is concluded - but as this was on their premises, it cannot be distance selling within the meaning of the Regulations. I must admit, it's a new one - I can't find mention of them adopting this position successfully anywhere online but I'm afraid it is fairly legally compelling. To counter this, you would need to try and show that the term around when the contract is concluded is a sham or unenforceable term, or more likely unfair, but even with the considerable leeway afforded to consumers in consumer contracts, you may struggle to defeat privity of contract. I think go back to trading standards and see where you can get.  
    • not a chance of police involvement after the event the police are not interested in small fry, just the big organised gangs that shoplift to fund drugs. dx
    • or just click any named forum and we'll move it here for you.   dx  
    • oh yea ta! one last question what date was the CCJ/Default judgement? dx
    • maybe a dodgy letter but you can avoid those too. police are VERY VERY unlikely so don't stress about that.
  • 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

Evri lost £169 leather jacket online mcol claim issued*** Settled at Mediation***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 131 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

nope we dont do private advice

one PDF for each

read upload carefully.

 

  • Like 1

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

you do not compromise at all , simply stick too you want the full cost of the item+postage+court fee.

they will barter through the mediator but simply stick to your guns.

the fact of wrong defendant etc is immaterial at mediation...don't get done over.

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

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

35 minutes ago, jk2054 said:

Ok 

Your claim form is different, but it won’t make too much difference at this stage.

Go to mediation, see what they offer.

They normally offer something in cases like this where they admit their loss

its the newish totally online MCOL system.

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Evri lost £169 leather jacket online mcol claim issued - defence filed - mediation time - help

no need to keep hitting quote post

just type!

 

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

I think the reasonable thing to do is to explain to the court that the real problem here is a technicality and that you should be permitted to amend the claim to reflect the correct identity of the defendant.


You've already pointed out quite correctly that they have provided a detailed defence so they are fully aware of the claim.

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

it wont hurt mediation, they will not be the least bit interested in a legal argument, not their bag.

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

  • AndyOrch changed the title to Evri lost £169 leather jacket online mcol claim issued - defence filed ***Settled in Full Mediation ADR***

:yo:

dx

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...