Zanussi Integrated dishwasher - £94 delivered @ B&Q Possible misprice

Princess_Coupon

Well done!
Can't wait to hear more

Silk

Great News :j

Eggs and Faces springs to mind
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

atro1

Great now kicking myself---as I knew I would!!
Well done!!

TBeckett100

Dear All

Beckett v B&Q - Newbury County Court on Weds 10th June 2009

The hearing kicked off a little after the scheduled 11.30am. I was asked to present my case.

I decided to kick things off with the emails on this forum, admitting what was written to take the sting out of the tail. I highlighted that today i could order 999 dishwashers so their system is flawed. I pointed out the contents of the forum does not have any bearing on the case, i.e. irrespective of what is said post ordering the dishwasher did not affect the validity of the contract.

I pointed out the T&C's of copying this thread. Tne Judge stated that the forum owners needed to raise the issue and it was not for her to rule on it.

I talked about the Sale of Goods Act and that I was seeking the difference between the value paid (and refunded) and the market value. I also talked about the term "we reserve the right to serve you at our discretion).

This i felt was the winning point. I explained that 'discretion' afforded B&Q to decide whether or not give me the dishwasher. However, as B&Q admitted when I asked them, only 7 were ever available (only 7!) and they couldnt get any more in. Therefore, as the Judge summed up, B&Q could not act with discretion.

I then talked about the Unfair Terms Contracts Act and when responding, the Trading Law Manager half smiled and told the judge it was irrelevant as it was criminal legislation. It was a heart stopping moment and embarrasing for the Trading Law Manager to be told by the Judge that the Act was not a criminal issue.

B&Q when having their say relied on the 'Discretion Issue' and the fact that the whole thing was an error on their system. However, I felt that I made my case demonstrating the offer was an offer to treat, my order and subsequent email from B&Q concluded the contract.

We were sent out for 15 minutes whilst the Judge considered her verdict

When returning, the Judge summed up to state that a contract had been clearly formed and the Discretion issue was not valid as there was no stock. In addition, I could claim for the loss of bargain and judgement was awarded in my favour.

On exiting the court, I asked the B&Q rep whether I should wait to hear from them before saying anything publicly and I was told "Do what you like Mr Beckett".

Therefore I see no reason why any disappointed person cannot submit a claim. I would issue a complaint first and follow due proceedure, but my previous article regarding the 2002 Kodak issue should warm the hearts of many.

To those who mocked me on this forum, I hope the judgment today has gone some way to demonstrating that sometimes we can be wrong. To those who have supported, thank you all.

Sophie_Rabbit

Well done.

maxtweenie

mattwallisuk wrote: »

I think its more likely the claim will be laughed out of court than the defence. Lets face it.

Ooooops!

Silk

mattwallisuk wrote: »

You won't get a positive response. It was an item that sold out, and they refunded you. If you think you may actually get anything more than a "sorry it sold out" letter/email then you are in cloud coockoo land. I am sure the usual suspects will reply to this post saying "bleh blah bleh" but at the end of the day you aren't going to get jack s*&t out of this so save your time and do something more productive.

I liked this one

TBeckett100

i will of course wait for the judgment to come and i will scan it on.

chipbeck

TBeckett100 wrote: »

i will of course wait for the judgment to come and i will scan it on.

!!!! the judgement Becket send me a dishwasher, just bought a second hand bosch one and it's pants.:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Nice one bud!

Charliex

Congratulations - well done you!