Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 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

ok, maybe a little strange


Carpet3
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6142 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

It amazes me how much the vast majority of people misunderstand their rights.

 

I don’t claim to be an expert myself, and I certainly don’t like giving wrong advice to people so I’d like to clear a few things up, so I may continue to give the best customer service I can.

 

What I’d like to do is throw a few scenarios at you, and see what the proper resolution should be, if that's ok?

 

Scenario 1:

Person A buys a printer; it becomes faulty after 4 months. As a store, the onus is on us to prove the fault wasn’t there at the time of manufacture (assuming we were going to dispute it). If we don’t dispute it, and are happy to resolve the issue, then we can firstly repair the product, and to do this we have a reasonable amount of time to do so, i.e. 28 days. If this isn’t done satisfactorily we can then move onto replacement etc. We also have the option to give the customer the manufacturers phone number so they may arrange for the repair themselves, as this would normally be quicker (although we do NOT insist they HAVE to do that)

Anything wrong with that?

 

Scenario 2:

Person B buys some PC software, they have opened the box (broken the seal) and now wish to return it as they no longer want it.

We refuse the return on the grounds of the copyright law.

That ok? What happens if they state they didn’t agree with the EULA?

 

Scenario 3:

Person C buys an item but decides they no longer require/want the item, but they have opened the box.

The item itself if is perfect working order but the box/packaging is obviously torn/damaged.

We either refuse the return or offer a return with a 10% re-stocking fee on the grounds that we will have to discount the item on re-sale.

That ok?

 

Scenario 4:

Person D buys a piece of software, they have tried installing it on several different PCs but each time it fails.

They return it to store for a refund on the basis it's faulty. We test the software on a PC in the store and find it's working ok.

We refuse the refund on the grounds that the software to be working on our pc must be functioning correctly, and any issues they have had, must lie with their PCs and not the software.

That ok?

 

Also, as a (very) quick overview, are my understandings correct on these specific points:

i) Once you have bought an item and opened it, as long as there isn’t anything wrong with it, it wasn’t missold etc. You have no legal right to return it.

ii) If you don’t open a product, you can legally request a refund within a reasonable amount of time (7 days?) as you aren’t deemed to have accepted the goods.

iii) If a product becomes faulty, the retailer has a reasonable amount of time to repair the product before the consumer can request a replacement/refund.

 

Hope you can help :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to be reading the sale of goods act dear boy

everything is there.

 

dx100uk

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

 

Also, as a (very) quick overview, are my understandings correct on these specific points:

i) Once you have bought an item and opened it, as long as there isn’t anything wrong with it, it wasn’t missold etc. You have no legal right to return it.

ii) If you don’t open a product, you can legally request a refund within a reasonable amount of time (7 days?) as you aren’t deemed to have accepted the goods.

iii) If a product becomes faulty, the retailer has a reasonable amount of time to repair the product before the consumer can request a replacement/refund.

 

Hope you can help :)

 

i.. Correct. Your only right would be contractual (i.e, if the store had a policy of, say, 14 days no quibble returns).

 

ii.. Not really. If bought in store, you have the chance to examine the goods or walk away. The issue about acceptance is to do with SoGA remedies. Conditions of a contract become warranties once a product has been accepted. With Distance Selling regs however, there is a returns period which allows a return for whatever reason

 

iii. If that is reasonable in comparison to other remedies and causes minimum inconvenience to the buyer, yes. A seller would not be expected to refund a coat with a faulty zip (it can be erpaired much more cheaply and should not take that long), but trying to fix all the components of a DVD player that has blown up (due to inherent fault) would require a refund or replacement as a repair would take too long and cost more than replacement.

 

Generally speaking, much of what a person is entitled to, and what rights they have, as well as what is or is not reasonable, is for a court to decide based on the circumstances. We can only assume what is reasonable and go from there. If there is a dispute, a court will make the decision based on the circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...