Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am not behind on any of my priority debts and have been paying them 1st, its just I can't find a way out of making the balances smaller as the interest and charges get piled on top every month.
    • your other expenses are the priority ones that must be paid 1st   are all these still with/paying the original creditors?
    • looks good to me   not due till / by 4pm monday
    • you need the particulars of claim ring northants bulk and ask them to send it by email pdf or get them to read it out ...RECORD YOUR CALL>   the sb date does not run from defaulted date.   there are numerous threads here on these backdoor erudio CCJ's when the loans had never eben deferred with erudio so must be sb'd.        
    • Hello Everyone   I would like some advice of when I should submit my defence to the court. The Claim form I received was dated 23/09/2021, however it didn't actually arrive with me until the 27/09/2021. I haven't received any response from LC Asset as of yet to my CCA Request and only what I would call stalling letter from Kearns as mentioned above on the 07/10/2021 to the CPR31:14 request.   I have also listed below a 1st draft of my defence and would appreciate any help and advice or suggested inclusions or amendments.   1.The Claimant (C) claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxx and opened xx/11/95. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) was signed by the Defendant (D) and from which credit was extended to D.   2.D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by 25/02/2010 a default was recorded. As at 15/12/2020 the Defendant owed Barclaycard PLC the sum of £3751.16.   3.By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective 15/12/2020 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   And C claims - 1, £3751.16, 2, Interest pursuant to section 69 County Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per Annum from 15/12/2020 to 23/09/2021 of £206.18 And thereafter at a daily rate 0.79 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date 23/09/2021     1, Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had in the past a contractual relationship with Barclaycard. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars therefore I am unable to admit or deny the alleged debt claimed. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my requests for further information.   2. Paragraph 2 is noted. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by Barclays Bank and received by the Defendant.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or Barclays Bank. 4. On the 05/10/2021 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and CCA1974 Section 78 request. The claimant as yet to respond to this request. Kearns as yet to respond in relation to the CPR 31.14 request. To date, 21/10/2021, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 5,It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   Thank you in advance of any help offered    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Currys Mobile Phone


DebtTrodden
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5297 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

 

Bought a mobile phone from Curry's in Dec 06. this has now gone faulty with its battery, stalk and memory card.

 

I tried to return it back to the branch by phoning them first in the begging of march 07. They said the phone would have to be sent away for repair. I didn't accept this as my wife requires the phone at all times due to illness and that when i purchase the phone i also purchased a 12 MONTH WARRANTY. I was told it is there policy to send all phones older than 28days away for repair. I asked why i was not told this upon purchase, nor had any paper work supplied that states this. In fact I asked why this was not worded on the bottom of there receipt? They would not budge. REPAIR ONLY.

 

In the end i wrote a curt and to the point letter to Curry's stating.

 

1. Why wasn't i told about this clause regarding repair.

2. why does it not state this on the bottom of their receipts.

3. They require the customer for business not the other way around

4. I look forward to a replacement phone

5. I bought the phone with a 12 month warranty, exchange or refund not a repair warranty as stated on their receipts.

 

Today i got a phone call back from Curry's head office basically telling me to jump. They were not prepared to replace the phone, they would only repair. I asked them if this was their policy why i wasn't told about this and why does it not get stated at the bottom of the receipts? Infact there receipt read as follows " PLEASE KEEP THIS RECEIPT. IT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR REFUNDS OR EXCHANGE" They had the nerve to tell me that I SHOULD HAVE ASKED!!!!

 

I am really peeved and angry now. Any advice would be welcome as I'm pig sick of being trodden on by so called BIG BOYS.

 

from a big 6ft 5 fella!!

 

COL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your statutory rights under the Sale of Goods Act would be a repair in the first instance, however if the warranty specifically states that they will exchange or refund, that's what you should be entitled to - under the warranty rather than your statutory rights.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No specific warranty was issued with the phone except the 12 month simple warranty. No warranty information relating to Currys, No paperwork relating to Currys except the receipt.

 

The only thing that i suppose you could class as the warranty was the receipt which states:

 

"PLEASE KEEP THIS RECEIPT. IT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR REFUNDS OR EXCHANGE"

 

No mention of the wording REPAIR.

 

Col

Link to post
Share on other sites

Warranties are bound by any terms and conditions which are included in them, so unless they specifically say they will cover a replacement or refund you can't demand this.

 

Your statutory rights, which are in addition to any warranty, would allow the trader to offer a repair in the first instance.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SO what your saying is that the only rights I have are my statutory rights which give the trader the right to repair before replace. Even though i thought my warranty is the reciept that says exchange or replace?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your warranty won't be the receipt; it will be any manufacturers warranty which is provided with the item and there should be terms and conditions detailed in this. This is in addition to your statutory rights, but most warranties tend to also allow for a repair in the first instance.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm confused somewhat. You purchased a phone AND a 12 month warranty? What did this provide for over and above the warranty that automatically comes with the handset? Since Curry's would have been legally obliged under SOGA fir the first year, paying additionally for the SAME 12 months must have brought some additional benefits... like a fast replacement or a new one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, you cannot insist on anything. The CAUSE of the fault would be the determining factor and it misuse is proved (like getting it wet), you're not even entitled to a 14-day replacement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that you have a phone which you obtained in December.

After about 2.5 months the phone failed. Curry's say that they want to repair it and you want an immediate replacement or refund to obtain another so that you do not have to suffer the inconvenience of being without a phone.

 

Your requirements sound reasonable enough to me. However there are few practical difficulties.

Firstly, your statutory rights - and probably your warranty rights will depend upon the extent of the failure of the phone. For instance, if it is just a duff battery then a court might well decide that a repair was in order. On the other hand if it was the failure of a piece of the circuitry then a court might feel that your contract had been breached fundamentally and that you were indeed entitled to a refund.

 

Once again I find myself in disagreement with Rosie as I don't think that one can make sweeping generalisations as to the nature of your rights without fully understanding the problem

 

The practical problem is that you have no way of knowing what is the fault with the phone without allowing Curry's to investigate it.

If you have prevented them from inspecting the phone then you have actually obstructed your own interests - even though that might be frustrating to accept.

The practical problem then deepens because once they have the phone for inspection then they may as well repair it. So at the end of the day you will have the phone returned to you in good order but you will have suffered the inconvenience which you so badly wanted to avoid.

If you so far have not allowed Curry's to inspect the phone then you are doing yourself a disservice.

You have a duty under law to mitigate your losses. this means that you are required to cooperate with a supplier to try and progress the problem. If you have an uncooperative supplier then you can take matters into your own hands.

Do I understand that because you refused to allow Curry's to have the phone that you have had to suffer nearly a 2 month period without the use of your phone? If tis is the case, then I am afraid that you will not be able to make any claim for this as it is you who have prevented the matter from being sorted out.

I would suggest that you let have Curry's have the phone for repair.

 

If you really do need a phone during the period of repair then I would suggest that you ask Curry's for a temporary replacement. If they are unwilling to give you one then I would put them on written notice that you need a replacement and that in view of their failure to provide you with one while they are remedying their breach of contract, you intend to take reasonable steps to hire or buy (a cheap) one and that you will be looking for reimbursement. They won't be happy about that and you would probably have to sue them but you would win.

However, it seems to me that the matter of a replacement phone isn't that important to you as you have been prepared to wait this long. A judge may well form the same view and at the end of the day I expect that the hassle of suing for this kind of thing is more hassle than it is worth.

However, if you decided to go down that road, act quickly. Don't be diverted by senseless exchanges of merely point-scoring correspondence.

 

What are your rights as a consumer?

 

It's easy.

If you pay 100% of the price then you expect 100% of the value for which you have paid.

Whether it is always worth enforcing it is a different matter.

 

Consumer empowerment is not always about squeezing the last drop from a supplier.

It is about making decisions which you deliberately make for your own benefit and not merely because you are overwhelmed by a more powerful bargaining partner.

There is no problem about being pragmatic and backing down - as long as you back down on equal terms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your requirements sound reasonable enough to me. However there are few practical difficulties.

Firstly, your statutory rights - and probably your warranty rights will depend upon the extent of the failure of the phone. For instance, if it is just a duff battery then a court might well decide that a repair was in order. On the other hand if it was the failure of a piece of the circuitry then a court might feel that your contract had been breached fundamentally and that you were indeed entitled to a refund.

 

Once again I find myself in disagreement with Rosie as I don't think that one can make sweeping generalisations as to the nature of your rights without fully understanding the problem

 

With respect, no matter what the fault, Currys are entitled to offer a repair once a "reasonable time" has passed. Case law and precedents in standard faulty goods cases would show that in this case, the reasonable time would almost certainly have passed. I would be 99.9% sure that a court would agree with this. The seriousness of fault itself does not make a difference to your rights.

 

For example, if someone bought a brand new car and two months later the engine blew up, it is a major fault yet the trader would still be entitled to offer a repair in the first instance.

 

If the fault is uneconomical to repair, the trader can offer a replacement. Only if this is not possible can the consumer then rescind the contract, which is basically obtaining a partial refund allowing for any use they have had (obviously if it's only been purchased a couple of months ago there is an argument for a full refund). But it would be down to the trader to decide whether a repair/replacement was a suitable remedy.

 

I am sorry that you disagree, but in my considerable experience this is how the law is interpreted and enforced in the civil courts.

 

 

 

If you really do need a phone during the period of repair then I would suggest that you ask Curry's for a temporary replacement. If they are unwilling to give you one then I would put them on written notice that you need a replacement and that in view of their failure to provide you with one while they are remedying their breach of contract, you intend to take reasonable steps to hire or buy (a cheap) one and that you will be looking for reimbursement. They won't be happy about that and you would probably have to sue them but you would win.

 

Not necessarily. Currys have a reasonable time in law to repair the phone. Unless it was made a term of the contract at the time of sale that he needed to have uninterrupted service, I would only see a claim such as this succeeding if they took an unreasonable length of time to carry out the repairs.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...