Consumer Rights: MoneySavingExpert.com discussion

Art_2

In view of the time he has had the item I would defend any court action. In your defence state that it was fully tested by you and found to be in working order. It is his responsibility to have checked the item upon receiving it.

There is always the possibility that he has used the item and caused the problem himself. It is up to him to prove the item was defective on receipt.

Regards,
Art.

derrick

Art wrote: »

In view of the time he has had the item I would defend any court action. In your defence state that it was fully tested by you and found to be in working order. It is his responsibility to have checked the item upon receiving it.

There is always the possibility that he has used the item and caused the problem himself. It is up to him to prove the item was defective on receipt.

Regards,
Art.

As you will be aware, under SoGA, it is up to the seller to prove the fault was not there at the time of purchase within the first 6 months, as it is only 2 months, then the onus is on the seller!

From SoGA
PART 5A. ADDITIONAL RIGHTS OF BUYER IN CONSUMER CASES;-
48A Introductory


"(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date."

.

Art_2

If the seller can convince the registrar that he had tested it and found it in working order then it is up to the registrar to decide who is telling the truth.

I have seen a number of cases where the court has decided in the light of probability that the seller was telling the truth. It could go either way.

Regards,
Art.

derrick

Art wrote: »

If the seller can convince the registrar that he had tested it and found it in working order then it is up to the registrar to decide who is telling the truth.

I have seen a number of cases where the court has decided in the light of probability that the seller was telling the truth. It could go either way.

Regards,
Art.

Yes I agree, but your last sentance in the quote I posted said, "It is up to him to prove the item was defective on receipt.", this contradicts the 6 month rule from the SoGA as quoted in my post, if the seller can prove it was working then he should have no problems, however if it is defective because of a manufacturing product, the buyer has redress against the seller, and the seller has to prove otherwise re the 6 month rule as surely if it goes faulty within 6 months, then it is "not fit for purpose" under SoGA.

From WHICH;-

"Six months...and countingIf your claim is about a problem that arises within six months of buying the product, it's up to the retailer to prove that the goods were fit for purpose – or 'as described' – when it sold them. It is also responsible for proving that the problem was caused by you (for example, because you had an accident with the item that damaged it). Beyond six months, it's up to you to prove that the problem was the retailer's."
.

deanos

Folks this is Ebay and a private sale, the SOGA does not apply surely ? (unless he is a business seller)

Art_2

I was about to make this point. If this was a private sale then SOGA is irrelevent.

Private sales only have to be 'as described' and not 'fit for purpose'.

Regards,
Art.

sunnyjasmina

We are updating an old house we have just bought and replacing the kitchen. I found a company on the internet and contacted them, They advertised a design service and sent a guy round to plan it for us. It all sounded great and after spending over 2 hours with him we agreed on a design.
He listed all the cupboards that we would need onto the order and they were delivered after a couple of weeks. All ok so far......
My husband is good at diy and is fitting the kitchen or at least he's trying to as half of the units don't fit where they should fit.
After contacting the firm I was told that all the units are a standard size and we will have to cut them to make them fit. I requested that the designer come back to help us sort it but "oh no we can't do that". We are now having to re-design the kitchen ourselves, I've e-mailed the owner of the company but am still awaiting a reply.
Any advise please?
Their after sales care leaves a lot to be desired and I am very angry..

derrick

deanos wrote: »

Folks this is Ebay and a private sale, the SOGA does not apply surely ? (unless he is a business seller)

Art wrote: »

I was about to make this point. If this was a private sale then SOGA is irrelevent.

Private sales only have to be 'as described' and not 'fit for purpose'.

Regards,
Art.

But it has to work! (unless described as not working). Just because it worked at packaging stage does not mean it still worked when received, and therefore is the sellers responsibility if it didn't.

IF the OP was a private seller? We need the OP, (fozzy97), to confirm? And they have not been back since asking for advice!

There are plenty of business sellers on Ebay.


.

OlliesDad

derrick wrote: »

But it has to work! (unless described as not working). Just because it worked at packaging stage does not mean it still worked when received, and therefore is the sellers responsibility if it didn't.

Not quite. In a private sale the seller has an obligation to be honest in the sale. If after the sale the buyer finds the item is not working, they have to prove that the seller was aware of the faults prior to the sale.

Although as has already been stated, we do not know whether this was a private sale or not.

derrick

OlliesDad wrote: »

Not quite. In a private sale the seller has an obligation to be honest in the sale. If after the sale the buyer finds the item is not working, they have to prove that the seller was aware of the faults prior to the sale.

Although as has already been stated, we do not know whether this was a private sale or not.

Doubt if a SCC judge would agree if it went that far

But unless the OP returns and confirms one way or anther we may never know.