obvious v itcsales.co.uk *** I WON ***

[obvious]

...

Obvious

 

don't think there is a prob with posting the emails up on here - as has already been discussed it would be hard to prove it was you that had posted them and they probably wouldn't be admissable anyway.

 

As to their offers what was the market value of the items you requested and the ones that you received, also what sum did you charge back to them?

I'm not going to reveal what I paid, the chargeback amount or what I sold any of them for

 

...so I'm not asking if the offer was reasonable, just whether it could reasonably be interpreted as applying to all of the units I wished to keep i.e. all of them. It's not a major point, just something that sprang to mind and I dont mind if ITC are reading.

[blacksheep1979]

If they offered £20 +vat for all the items you sold then I would have thought that would be fair to apply to all of them.

 

Wasn't asking what you paid or sold them for just was curious about the difference between market price of what you ordered and received and how close this was to what you charged back - am guessing you also had to take into account the cosmetic damage

[jonni2bad]

Then let's finally put one issue to bed.

 

The IP address is inconclusive and will not be made available. As Martin has already suggested, the thread was in danger of being hijacked. If anyone wishes to discuss the scenario as a possible use in further actions, please start a new thread.

Further 'off topic' posts will be removed.

[obvious]

Just got back from the hearing. It was a bit nerve wracking but the district judge made everybody feel as comfortable as possible and the whole thing was reasonably informal.

 

In the end the court ordered that in addition to me keeping the money from the credit card company which they'd charged back from ITC, I be awarded a small additional sum.

 

ITC's claim was dismissed and my counterclaim was upheld. :D

 

Thought I should report back here. Thanks for (most ) of the help and advice.

 

Cheers

Paul

[jonni2bad]

Paul, that's absolutely great news... well done.

 

Many thanks for letting us know the outcome - I've altered the thread title accordingly

[mykey38]

Well I have used ITC once before and luckily everything went ok.

Having read both this thread and the one on Hexus it leaves me with the feeling that I could never buy from them again. Not because Obvious had a problem, but because of the underhanded way that ITC tried to put him of by registering and posting on both forums as supposedly interested (buy not involved parties) very very poor show boys.

I suggest perhaps you learn from this and in future act like business people not school children. Well done Obvious - another win for the consumer.

[obvious]

One thing of interest that I wasn't able to fully test is whether in the event of a chargeback by the credit card company, a supplier can claim against a customer.

 

I asked for summary dismissal to be considered on the grounds that I'd never received any monies from ITC ie I'd asked the credit card company to comply with their obligations under S.75 CCA. Since they (the card issuers) were equally liable for upholding the contract on the original sale, they had to pony up the dough when the goods weren't as described.

 

I argued that how the credit card company then decided to proceed (eg make a chargeback against ITC's merchant account) was entirely up to them and nothing to do with me.

 

In the end the Judge didn't rule on this point and dismissed ITC's claim on other grounds but it might be a reasonable idea (IANAL) for anyone else in a similar situation to carefully word the letter to the card issuer so as not to directly ask for a chargeback but just request that they credit your account in accordance with the terms of the Act