Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'goods'.
-
Hi Guys, Hope someone can help me with this one. CAB were not much use. I purchased a used Heat Press from a guy in Scotland (i am in England). I asked the questions i needed answering , does the thing do what it's supposed to do. He emailed saying yes it was in perfect worker order. I bought it, it arrived next day, plugged it in and......no heat. I informed the guy straight away and he said he would sort it. I said a repair (at his cost) was exceptable or a refund. He then contacted the manufacturer and emailed a mail saying it was "all sorted" with the company to send it to them and he would cover the cost. Luckily, i didn't send it. I emailed the company and asked what the guy had "sorted" with them and they said just the £25 shipping charge to collect from me and drop to them ! I emailed the guy back and said this wasn't exceptable to me and could i have a refund or repair. No, he decided to claim off the courier despite not having purchased additional insurance. They said no and offered standard £20 compensation which he then said he had paid into my paypal account - he never did. I again said this was unacceptable and would accept a repair (at his cost) or a refund. A lot more waffle went under the bridge but the crux of it is , he won't refund or repair. How do i stand on this ? I made sure i asked the questions BEFORE i bought it. Surely i can't be held responsible for the damage when the item never worked at all. Any help appreciated as i want to file a small claim if i have the right to Cheers
-
Do i have to accept the offer of a refund for goods?
Jackhammer2015 posted a topic in General Retail
Hi I have been offered a full refund on a faulty item I bought but I would prefer a repair. Do I have the legal right to turn down the offer of a refund and demand a repair? Thanks. -
It is an important question, and one which needs resolving one way or the other. I should say at the onset that IMO the only definitive answer will have to be passed down in a court case, in the mean time I suspect the EA community will have their own interpretation others may differ. I suspect the problem is the result of yet more unintended consequences of the TCE, the definition of goods of the debtor includes interest in goods, the point that needs clarifying is, if goods on HP can ever bestow an interest before the last payment on the agreement. From my understanding of HP the hirer has no interest in goods until the transfer of title(which is the last payment) until this time the goods are on hire, and the property of the lender. So if the EA seeks to sell the vehicle he must have permission of the lender. It is well documented that a consumer credit agreement(or hp) cannot be terminated until a default notice is served and the hirer has time to remedy, and until this time the lender has no right in law to seize the vehicle. (after one third of the agreement price has been paid). However within most agreements is a clause which states that the vehicle must at all time remain in possession of the debtor/hirer, so when the vehicle is removed it could be said that the hirer was in breach, and after issuance of the default notice could re-possess the vehicle and allow the EA to sell. The matter of, if this would be worth the EAs time would depend on the amount of money which would be left after the car had been repossessed, sold and the agreement settled. The interesting point about this, is that neither A term of the agreement nor the TCE can not allow seizure. Once the car is in the EAs possession there may be an argument for sale but there is, as far as I can see, no argument for taking control. The car is after all third party goods at that point. -
Hi , Not sure if anyone can help here however I applied for finance to purchase a machine. The finance was agreed and forms sent out for me to complete. Included in the forms was a certificate of acceptance for the machine stating it was in good working order. I called the provider to say I was signing for the finance but would not sign the acceptance until I had viewed the machine. After a month of delays the machine arrived however it was not as described. There were numerous defects and it had logged over 25% more hours worked than had been advertised. I called the supplier immediately to tell them it was unacceptable and to remove it from site. They apologised and promised to resolve the issues. They have not and I insisted they take the machine back as I requested in the first instance. I also informed the finance company on the first day that it was unacceptable and not to pay out any money as the deal was to be aborted. I have since discovered that they have taken payments from my bank. They insist I must maintain payments for the machine (which has since been removed) despite me informing them that it was unacceptable and to cancel the finance. In clause 1.1 of the finance proposal it states that if I find the goods to be defective, I must inform them within 5 working days. I did so within an hour. Am I within my rights to withhold any finance payment for this machine and can I claim my money back. I continue to hire a machine as the one I was purchasing was defective as well as having to pay finance on a machine I do not have. Any comment / advise welcome. Thanks in advance -
Last year at a show in Oct we ordered a Kampa Air Ace porch awning with an electric pump for our caravan paying for it with a Barclaycard. We changed our minds the next day and ordered a bigger awning plus an awning carpet paying the balance with the same card. The awning and carpet arrived in November. We were only able to erect the awning at end of November for 1 night and all seemed well, however on first use we found the carpet to be faulty and returned it. This was exchanged for another type of carpet. Both carpets are "custom made" in bulk for this particular awning. The electric pump only arrived in late February so we could not use the awning in between as we both suffer from arthritis and pumping up the awning by hand was difficult and painful. We then used the awning again over Easter and then noticed quite large marks on the roof in the centre of the awning which only shows up in a certain light. Another mark was a large X with the number 2 next to it. We tried to brush it out but to no avail. We also used the curtains for the first time and found one to have a broken clip. We then used the awning again 3 weeks ago and one of the other curtains on second use had started to fray at the bottom as the stitching was coming apart. We also noticed that we had heavy condensation in the awning. We do expect some but not to the extent where you touch the awning roof and it is like an Amazon forest rainfall inside the awning. We also has some heavy rain and this gathered in a large puddle on the roof of the awning and the concern here is the weight of the water stretching the material. We had to keep emptying the area every hours. Luckily we were at the caravan as if we had been out for the day, who knows what may have happened. We have approached the supplier who has bent over backwards to help us however the manufacturer cannot supply replacement curtains until later in the year when the caravan season has ended for us and neither can the manufacturer supply a replacement awning until later in the year as it has to come from China. BTW there is a label on the awning of the Union flag with the words "Designed in UK" which could possibly be construed as being manufactured in the UK. As we think waiting several months for replacements is unacceptable is unreasonable and even then the replacement may suffer from condensation or water pooling on the roof, the supplier has agreed to take back the awning only at this point for an inspection but how will they test it for pooling on the roof and condensation? At this point all we want is a refund for the anwing and other associated items. Is this a reasonable request even if they inspect the awning and cannot actuall "see" any issues like the water pooling and condensantion issues. Many other people have complained about the latter two issues and a Google shows up these issues. -
Hello, I privately rent my house thought a letting agent and told them on their last inspection last month that the lock on our garage was broken and the goods in side were not secure, the garage is not attached to the house but about 30mts from the house. we moved everything we possible could from out there to the house but could not fit in all my sons expensive fishing gear as the rods were too long and a moped (for obvious reasons although it had a lock on ) About 5 month ago we had stuff stolen from our garden, about £1500 worth of profession fishing gear that was soaking wet and had been propped up against our patio doors to dry out, they were there for all of half an hour before being stolen , we have a 6 foot fence and also a gate that locks. so this was why I was anxious the landlord fixed the garage asap. As to if the letting agent passed this on to our landlord I do not know. Am I wrong in thinking that the landlord has a responsibility to repair and make secure the garage ??? I feel he should compensate for our loss from the garage this time......we claimed on insurance for the theft last time as I guess we were responsible for leaving out even though the garden was secure. Any advice is appreciated. I am thinking they will keep coming back so am in the process of looking for another house and I can't sleep well because of the worry and anxiety. -
Recently we had our bathroom done and ordered some glass splashbacks from an on-line company called Cameo Glass to fit round our wash basin. When we ordered custom made white glass splashbacks (for some £200), we (reasonably, I hope), expected something made from opaque white glass. Nothing on their website suggests otherwise, though we now know competitor websites do make it plain that this is not the case. What turned up was white back-painted "clear" glass. This wouldn't in itself be a big problem if they had actually used truly clear glass. What we got has a distinct blue tint to it. On the left is what we've now used in our bathroom... [ATTACH=CONFIG]56336[/ATTACH] We tried to get a refund, and were simply told "that's what it's like". We are in the process of putting a chargeback request through Nationwide but they're being useless and have twice written to us first saying that this doesn't fall within the bounds of a chargeback, yet confirming in the same letter that "goods not as described" is one of the categories, then latterly saying that it's our problem for misinterpreting what we were buying. I have now asked them to show me where it explains on Cameo Glass' website that "white glass" is in fact white painted, slightly blue-tinted clear glass. I think the mistake we made was complaining about it not being white glass, but back-painted, rather than placing emphasis on it not actually being white (though this was stated in the original complaint). What do you think? -
I purchased a Morphy Richards steam iron from Amazon back in July 2013. The iron has now developed a problem it's tripping the mains, checked the warranty on the Amazon site which states: *Standard one year guarantee can be extended to 3 years by registering your product with Morphy Richards. It seems that I forgot to register the iron when it was first purchased, but why offer a 3 year guarantee when you register a product? From now on I will make sure every new electrical goods is registered..
-
This is going to be, I fear, a bit of a long winded post, so apologies for that right from the start. Yesterday (23rd June), my property was visited by an "enforcement agent" (I'm going to say bailiff from now on, as it's quicker to type) from Bristow & Sutor. I wasn't home, but my partner was (the debt (council tax) is in both our names). It is important to note that I am NOT trying to get out of paying the council tax for a second, I know that has to be paid, but I do need advice on this controlled goods agreement. Anyway... The bailiff knocked on the door and my partner answered it. He (the bailiff) then went on to explain why he was there. He told her that he was there to make an arrangement to pay, which was fine, we owe it, so we've got to pay it, I don't have any real problem with that (apart from their fees ) but she was pressured/intimidated into signing it. All of the paperwork for this 'agreement to pay' was filled in by the bailiff, and my partner was told to sign it. Thinking that she was only signing an agreement to a payment plan, she signed it (we've had words ) but in fairness to her, the bailiff was suggesting that he had all sorts of powers to force entry etc etc, she was told that the sheaf of papers that the bailiff was filling in was all to do with the changes in the law in April. As I said, she was more or less intimidated into signing this paperwork on the doorstep. He then left her with copies of the paperwork. An important point to note at this point is that at no time did the bailiff set foot inside the door When I got home, I looked through the paperwork that she'd signed, and it's a "Controlled Goods Agreement" (Walking Possession as was). This 'agreement' states that the bailiff has "taken control of our goods" and unless the payment plan is kept to (which we can't afford to pay, but the bailiff refused to negotiate) they'll be back to seize our goods which they've apparently taken control of. A couple of points I've noted from the 1st part of the paperwork is that it is filled in incorrectly (albeit minor errors). 1). The bailiff has spelt my partners name incorrectly. 2). The "Enforcement Stage Fee" doesn't add up. As I understand it, that should be £235 plus 7.5% of any amount of the debt over £1,500. This actually means that the 'enforcement stage fee' is 20.575p higher than it should be. Yes, I know, it's only 20 and a bit pence, but it means that it's not factual. But now, the more important things. In the 2nd part of the paperwork, the bailiff claims that he has entered the property (he hasn't) and then issued a "Notice After Entry" and claims to have taken control of our goods. However, on the next sheet, the bailiff has ticked the box marked "I have taken control of the following" and then listed... "As previous inventory" Now, I've lived here 18 years, and unless the bailiff has snuck in disguised as the guy who fixes washing machines, no bailiff has EVER been inside the front door, so by my reckoning there cannot be a "previous inventory" and perhaps it would be more truthful to have written "as previously invented". So, the main point of this post is to ask your advice. Are we under threat of these goons coming back to try and force entry (although that sounds like a silly question now I've typed it). Is this document valid, or can I take it up to the bathroom to use as we see fit would be a better question. My partner is now terrified that they'll come back while I'm at work, and I don't know what to tell her. Help! -
I purchased online a PS4 from John Lewis which is till under 2 yr warranty(it is just over 1 yr old). One of the sticks on the controller has become loose and makes characters difficult to control. There is no damage on it I phoned John Lewis and they told me to contact Sony. I contacted Sony and they told me they only deal with 1st year of warranty and referred me back to..... John Lewis . After i complained ,John Lewis contacted me and told me take the whole console to one of their stores for testing . Now, shouldn't they should arrange for a courier to collect it from me ? - as other companies have in similar situations .
-
Hi I'd be grateful for poster's thoughts on the following query. In a business to business context, can a supplier's contract terms delete the reasonable quality or fit for purposes terms implied from the sale of goods act. So, for example, would a term stating "instead of any warranty implied by law, we will replace the product if you give us 10 days notice" be enough to permit the supplier to say that I (as a small business), because of this term, cannot rely upon the fitness for purpose terms in the Sale of Goods Act. Thanks
-
When a car is clamped and control of the goods has been effected. Who owns or is responsible for the vehicle? I have just had my car clamped for non payment of a parking ticket. My fault I know. The car is worth much less than the amount I owe, and I don't mind them taking it. It is now on a public highway. If I can't use the car, and they don't at this stage seem interested in taking it to auction. Why should I keep it insured? -
From my recent experiences with Overclockers UK, it would appear that they have a policy NOT to issue refunds on the outgoing shipping charges in the event they sell you a faulty item. I purchased a new computer display on Friday 13th (should have known better!), which arrived the following day. This display was touted as being extremely accurate in colour expression, which is one of the reasons I opted for this model. It was only released a few weeks ago. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-211-SA The display itself had terrible backlight bleed and it's colour accuracy, probably because of this, was awful. [ATTACH=CONFIG]56098[/ATTACH] I spoke to Overclockers on the Monday to arrange a return and full refund due to the fault. To their credit, they did arrange to collect the item the following day. I since picked up a much better screen at around half the price. Yesterday I received an email from Overclockers informing me that I would be refunded in full, less my shipping charges of £20.70. When I rang to query this, I was told that the shipping component was a seperate service that had been supplied and it was not Overclocker's policy to refund such charges - even when the goods are faulty. (N.B. They agreed the backlight bleed was really bad). There is nothing in Overclocker's T&C's that states this. Regardless the Sales of Goods Act states that a full refund should be given, including postage costs and any other losses that have been incured as a direct result of recieving faulty goods. Had I simply changed my mind about the display (i.e. if it was not faulty), then I would have still been entitled to the basic cost of getting the item to me as per the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013. Overclockers' T&C's state something similar. However, when presented with this information I was still refused a refund. Furthermore I was refused a conversation with the manager, even though the advisor himself had consulted with him/her only moments before. Again, something along the lines of "Company Policy". Only after repeated insistence that Overclockers would be breaking the law should they not provide a refund, did the adviser apparently receive a "thumbs-up" from his manager to "authorise a refund in this instance". Great - but it would still appear the company stance is not to provide this automatically for other consumers! Incidentally, the display itself is now listed at a £60.00 reduction for "this week only". Wonder why... ----- Sadly, I did record the conversation using a new app on my phone but the record quality is terrible! If I can clean it up I'll try and post it on YouTube. -
3053548.thumb.jpg.6ea05a752ac6bbf38ae4e7be9676053a.jpg)
The new bailiff regulations came into effect on 6th April and bailiff fees are strictly controlled and comprise of a Compliance Fee of £75 which is charged when the debt is passed by the creditor. If payment is not made or a payment agreement entered into during the ‘compliance stage’ a bailiff may attend the debtors premises and an Enforcement Fee of £235 is chargeable. Significantly, the new regulations provide that from any payment made (whether to the bailiff, the magistrate court or the local authority) the Compliance Fee of £75 is deducted first with the balance being split on a ‘pro rata’ basis between the debt to the creditor and bailiff fees. This novel approach means that unless the amount due (including bailiff fees) is paid in full, bailiff enforcement may continue and it is this point alone that has caused extreme difficulty to some ‘debt avoidance’ websites with associations to the Freeman on the Land (FmoTL) movement and 9 months after the regulations came into effect it is astonishing that debtors are continuing to be advised by such websites to avoid paying bailiff fees by paying the amount of the Liability Order or court fine only (minus bailiff fees). Despite the regulations clearly outlining how payments are to be calculated, in May/June an individual made numerous Freedom of Information requests to Local Authorities seeking clarification as to how they deal with direct payments made to them after accounts have been passed to bailiffs. Since that time many more FOI requests have been made on the same subject and the up to date position is that approx a quarter of all local authorities have received requests on the same subject. What has been the outcome of these Freedom of Information request? Typically, in the very early stages (May and June) most responses made clear that the local authorities had very little idea as to how the new regulations would work in practice but, since August/September the vast majority of responses confirm that they apportion the payment as outlined in the legislation and that they advise the bailiff company accordingly (or credit the bailiff company) with the payment. PS: It is likely that there are far more FOI requests than outlined here. I have only referred to those that are available to view publicly on the FOI website: What do They Know. -
quick question can a bailiff force entry after peaceful entry and control of goods signed are failed to make payments under agreement -
Hello, First off, I didn't realise that forums like this existed and have already found some great discussions! I am a relative newbie to all of this, so thanks in advance for the help/tips. I have been storing some belongings for a friend for several months now in my home. They have remained in bags in my living room and there are around 6-7 blacksacks of goods there. Due to unfortunate circumstances our friendship has ended, however I still have the items in my house. I am attempting to get the chap to come and collect the items, however he is being suprisingly unwilling to claim them. We only ever had a verbal agreement that he can store the items in my home, as friends would. I am in email contact with this guy (has no fixed address) and have provided him with an inventory of all the items he has left. I have come across the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 which appears helpful for this type of situation. However, there are clear rules within this tort that relate to getting rid of the items as long as there is no dispute. Now that there is a dispute I am slightly lost as to what to do. The house will be put up for sale ASAP and I expect to be gone within the next few months ... I do not what to spend any money on moving his gear with me and I wish to cut all ties with him. FYI there are a few of his belongings which are worth a considerable amount of money. He has advised that he does not want his items disposed of (naturally). Last week he said that he would not collect any of the items unless he also recieves 3 items which we had a shared interest in. I replied to this and advised that I am willing to relinquish any interest I have in the shared items and he can take them aswell (these cost me around £300, however I am happy to give them to him to get him out). Now he's come back again and said he will not collect any of the items as there are some missing from the inventory. I am confident that this is not true, and perhaps a hope to keep the items in my home free of charge (as he has no fixed address). He was never a lodger in my home and we had no formal agreement for storage of these items. It was simply a favour I offered him at the time. Please can anyone help with some guidance/advice on how I can handle this situation as the Tort stipulates the rules for selling/disposing of items only where there is no dispute. Many thanks -
I had some home improvements done this year and I am currently in dispute about payment with the company and i'm after a little advice please. The goods and installation were purchased from the same company and an install date agreed with them, it was supposed to take 1 day. The installation team turned up as arranged and it was clear from the outset it was not going to go well. The company weren't interested when I called them and sure enough the work was very badly done. One particular item of goods supplied was damaged and of poor quality, it was accepted under protest (signed on the form). The company agreed to replace this damaged item and agreed to supply a different model (same cost). They also agreed to the remedial works required but this took 5 or 6 attempts over a period of 8 weeks at great inconvenience to me. During the install and remediation works, they damaged a number of things in my home. When it came to pay them the balance, I made an offer of payment lower than the invoice amount due to the incompetence, inconvenience & damage to my home - the aim being that we would then negotiate meeting somewhere in the middle. Immediately I received a letter from them threatening me with legal action and revocation of the guarantee. It's worth pointing out at this stage that the company is a member of a number of trade organisations and by refusing to issue a guarantee they are in breach of their memberships. In addition they should have protected our deposit with one of these organisations at the outset but didn't. Each time I attempt to negotiate with them, I just receive a letter back threatening me with legal action. In their T&C's it states that in the event of any issues, they use the arbitration services of one of these organisations and at no point have they offered this by simply saying they are setting their legal dept on us. I have plenty of photographic evidence of the entire start to finish install fiasco and all correspondence showing that we are not refusing payment, merely want to negotiate taking into account the issues. The figure is well under the limit for small claims court, my question here is what I can expect if this does get put to the small claims court. My only experience of small claims court is some years ago when I took a kitchen company to court for the shambles they made installing my kitchen, in that case I had already paid and was claiming some money back from them to enable the job to be completed by another tradesman - in that case the photographic evidence and letters convinced the Judge and he awarded me a full refund (more than I was seeking)
-
I hope someone can help About 6 months a go I ordered some building materials. I have only just got round to using them and it turns out that they have sent some items and I have paid for these items and I never ordered them. Can I insist they take them back and refund them even though some 6 months has passed please, or am I going to have to just take it on the chin? I should have checked everything before now really and its not for a vast amount but just wondered where I stood legally Thank you Thank you
-
I recently purchased a Playstation 4 for my son for Christmas from my mothers catalog company called Kays. We bought it on credit at £500 over 32 weeks and have paid the first instalment. My son was unable to use it for four days during Christmas as the Playstation network was down. We have now set it up for him to find that the disk drive is faulty and will spit out the game disk or not accept it at all. I contacted Sony who after troubleshooting this with me agreed that the unit was faulty and that they would accept it for repair. I know from working with repairing computers and consoles that sending this back to the manufacturer can take weeks and often months to get it back. Beside that I feel as it is supposed to be brand new I didn't want a repaired console, I wanted a new working console, especially as I have paid £100 more than what they cost in the shop. I asked my mother to contact Kays and have them collect it and replace it. My mother did this and was told that we must return the unit to Sony as they will not accept it back if it has been plugged in, faulty or not! I feel this is outrageous as we did not buy it from Sony and have no contract with them and I have never been told I can't return goods less than 30 days old that don't work correctly and get a refund or replacement. So I wonder can anyone tell me if goods bought on credit from a catalog are subject to special terms where the creditor takes no liability for the goods they supply? I appreciate any help here as Kays won't budge.
-
Has anyone else noticed the MOJ link to the 'new' National Standards cannot be found on the MOJ site anymore: http://aka.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf They can be found here (third link down): https://www.gov.uk/search?q=bailiffs Is there a reason for this, or is it just a technical blip? -
Hi, I bought an ex-display electrical item last year and about 6 months down the line it appeared that the bulb inside the item had blown, but didn't do anything like attempt to replace the bulb until almost 6 months later, where I found that it wasn't the bulb at all but part of the circuitry inside that had failed. I still had the receipt and box and took it back to the place where I had bought the item. They said that after all this time it wasn't something they were legally obliged to replace/exchange or refund for. I am having to pay for a replacement part from the retailer instead. Where do I legally stand here? (I sent the item back to the retailer just within 12 months of purchase.) -
Getting married soon and ordered a personalised cake topper. When it came it was not really the same style as the photo example. Specifically, the "Mr" and "Mrs" are not at different levels and the first letter of our surname is not overly large as in the example (see below) The example pictured is as so: The one we got looks like this (click for bigger): [ATTACH=CONFIG]54567[/ATTACH] Emailed the seller the asking if she could make one with the above features, reply was: Thank you for getting in touch, I apologise for the long delay in getting back to you. We are sorry to hear you are unhappy with your order. I have had a look at the photograph you have sent to us, and can see that the way the & has been placed is due to the letters included in your name. Because of the L we are unable to have the exact same design as Mr and Mrs Smith. We are always happy to send a proof before processing an order if this is requested. Unfortunately we are unable to send a replacement free of charge as this item is not faulty or damaged. However we would be happy to include 25% discount on a new order. I replied with: I understand that each design will be different due to the different letters in various surnames and it is unfortunate that ours didn't allow for the usual style to be applied. What really attracted us to your design was that it had multiple levels of words (The "Mr" high up, stylish large "&" followed by a lower level "Mrs". The surname also had a large Capital which balances out/matches the large "&" sign). I'm sure you can understand why we are slightly disappointed with the end result, as it has very few of the advertised example's features. If it is not possible, as you have said, to create a topper with a similar concept to the example using our surname; then can I regretfully request a refund. I don't like to ask, and I am more than happy to cover the original postage costs. She said: Thank you for getting back to me, unfortunately as this item is a personalised item we are unable to offer a refund or exchange. However as a gesture of goodwill I can either refund you 25% of the order or we can offer a 25% discount on a new order with another design. So, It is a personalised item, but it doesn't really match the example. Am I entitled to my money back? or is the 25% off actually more than generous? I'm just interested more than anything, as to whether she's right or not. -
Hi, we spent 430 on a lay z spa Monaco hot tub. We bought it in may and it was delivered 25 th June. We've since had to replace the whole pump thrift lay z spa warranty and now it's gone again. We're feed up as we go outside to use it and it's not working. We have spent loads looking after it, correct chemicals cleaning etc. Can we take back to argos. Want money back Thanks -
Hi, I'm hoping someone could give me a sense check here: I bought a fairly expensive toy on line, when we received it the finish and paintwork was really poor. I contacted the seller who acknowledged the quality issues and offered a partial refund which wouldn't really cover the problem. I've asked for a refund to be told i have to fund return postage (I'm well aware this is wrong under the sake of goods act) and that the retailer will inspect the item and decide how much of a refund they feel like paying as the item as been taken out of the box and therefore according to them isn't in the same condition and worth the same amount. This has gone on for a period of time and ultimately left me unfortunately having to refer the matter to the small claims court. The retailers defence is that I haven't incurred a loss as I haven't sent the gods back for them to inspect. Given they expect me to fund postage and have stated they want to value how much the item is now worth, I've not returned it and am happy for the court to decide What do you think, should I send it back or hold on to it?
-
Hi was looking for some advice for a friend of mine please. She went back to the pawnbrokers to buy back her rings which are worth a substantial amount of money well within the given timescale but when she got their to by them back she was told they had been sold what rights does she have and what can she do. Tinks Sorry mean't to put this in legal section can someone from site team please transfer.
.thumb.jpg.b88b2d2ba5cda7e586289c8ca5cfa98c.jpg)
