Argos false advertising

4743hudsonj

Tozer wrote: »

DSR doesn't apply in this case as it was not purchased online or by other 'distance' method.

Bottom line is that if the OP can prove that the item reserved was not the same one as he ordered, then there is a fundamental breach of contract entitling him to a refund - providing he acts quickly in this case.

i know, i had just explained to someone who confused the two

derrick

mwilletts wrote: »

Erm, no I'm not:

Currently, Consumers are entitled to expect that goods are:

Accurately described;
Are of a satisfactory quality; and
Are fit for the purpose for which they are commonly supplied.

Satisfactory quality includes a number of factors including:
Appearance and finish;
Safety;
Durability;
Freedom from minor defects.

In simple terms this means that goods MUST NOT be faulty.

The consumer is allowed a reasonable time to inspect the goods to ensure that they meet with the above requirements. Where they do not, the consumer can reject the goods and claim a full refund.

Erm yes you are! DSRs have nothing to do with the OPs problem as they do not apply!

The points quoted by you in this post are correct re SoGA, not DSRs, that actually give more protection/rights.
Read my post #11 again! The OP paid for and took the item, they should have checked it was correct in store, they should have a comeback if they can prove the store gave them the incorrect item, otherwise it is up to the stores goodwill.

I still cannot see why the OP could not see if the item was the correct one! I ordered a PVR online last week, then went to pick it up, I could see quite plainly that it was the one ordered, in fact even at the pay point it was stated the item and cost, so I knew it was correct even before I parted with any money.

derrick

4743hudsonj wrote: »

i agree totally

you are confusing soga and dsr

soga offers no cooling off and inspection time as this is given to you in the shop before you buy! thats why dsr does offer it as you have not bought in shop so couldn't possibly inspect the goods

dont post when you dont know what your talking about and use stuff off google that surprise surprise is wrong

the op could have done that themselves

That is what I said in my post #11, mwillets disagreed, thanks for confirming.

4743hudsonj wrote: »

i know, i had just explained to someone who confused the two

Which is also what I did in post #11.

Tozer

I think what mwillets is pointing out is that the implied terms under SoGA apply as at the point of contract and continue for a period of time thereafter.

Saying: The consumer is allowed a reasonable time to inspect the goods to ensure that they meet with the above requirements. Where they do not, the consumer can reject the goods and claim a full refund.

is not inconsistent with the SoGA.

Meepster

Tozer wrote: »

I think what mwillets is pointing out is that the implied terms under SoGA apply as at the point of contract and continue for a period of time thereafter.

Saying: The consumer is allowed a reasonable time to inspect the goods to ensure that they meet with the above requirements. Where they do not, the consumer can reject the goods and claim a full refund.

is not inconsistent with the SoGA.

Thanks Tozer, I'm glad someone sees what I was getting at. I understand fully the differences between SOGA and DSR and I was quoting from the 2002 amendments to SOGA, nothing to do with he DSR's.

I think the flow chart on Page 4 of the document below explains what I was getting at (note the term misdescription)

http://www.secola.org/db/2_12/gb_noteslong.pdf

stugib

4743hudsonj wrote: »

soga offers no cooling off and inspection time as this is given to you in the shop before you buy! thats why dsr does offer it as you have not bought in shop so couldn't possibly inspect the goods

4743hudsonj wrote: »

yes but thats goods being not as described

thats different to what you were quoting which was referring to a right to return under any circumstance

your sources were wrong but luckily your advice was partially correct as they do not have an automatic right to a refund

derrick wrote: »

Read my post #11 again! The OP paid for and took the item, they should have checked it was correct in store, they should have a comeback if they can prove the store gave them the incorrect item, otherwise it is up to the stores goodwill.

This thread is all very confusing. For one, it was not me quoting things, it was mwillets. I was pointing out that there is a period of time between purchase and acceptance which the last part of mwillets' quote was referring to IMHO, not the DSRs which others assumed. DSRs have nothing to do with rejection which that part quoted IIUC.

Secondly, you're saying the SOGA does apply when goods are not described but this is not a case of that? If Argos are describing it as one model, and the OP purchased on that basis, but found it was a different model, then what is that if not inaccurately described? I've had Acer laptops before. IIRC the boxes usually just say '250 series' without naming the specific model. It's wrong, and unrealistic, to suggest that a consumer has to check things conform to contract before they leave the shop because only DSRs allow that. Example: say the laptop described said 4GB. When they got it home it had 2GB. You can't be saying that because they didn't spend 2 hours booting up Windows for the first time in the shop then they lose the right to reject?

In my simple terms:
DSR = subjective, generic - does this product class meet my requirements? In a shop you'd do this consideraton before purchase, distance you do this within 7 days of receipt.

SOGA = factual/objective, specific - does this particular item meet promised quality, description etc. Happens between purchase and acceptance, with option of rejection if it doesn't meet contract.

Tozer

stugib wrote: »

This thread is all very confusing. For one, it was not me quoting things, it was mwillets. I was pointing out that there is a period of time between purchase and acceptance which the last part of mwillets' quote was referring to IMHO, not the DSRs which others assumed. DSRs have nothing to do with rejection which that part quoted IIUC.

Secondly, you're saying the SOGA does apply when goods are not described but this is not a case of that? If Argos are describing it as one model, and the OP purchased on that basis, but found it was a different model, then what is that if not inaccurately described? I've had Acer laptops before. IIRC the boxes usually just say '250 series' without naming the specific model. It's wrong, and unrealistic, to suggest that a consumer has to check things conform to contract before they leave the shop because only DSRs allow that. Example: say the laptop described said 4GB. When they got it home it had 2GB. You can't be saying that because they didn't spend 2 hours booting up Windows for the first time in the shop then they lose the right to reject?

In my simple terms:
DSR = subjective, generic - does this product class meet my requirements? In a shop you'd do this consideraton before purchase, distance you do this within 7 days of receipt.

SOGA = factual/objective, specific - does this particular item meet promised quality, description etc. Happens between purchase and acceptance, with option of rejection if it doesn't meet contract.

Yep, agree with this.

Bottom line is, if OP bought by description (he went in with an online reservation already made) then retailer is liable to put right the problem.

I don't think too many of us spend ages reading all of the detail on the box in order to ensure it is the right product nor should we be expected to.

Meepster

Tozer wrote: »

Yep, agree with this.

Bottom line is, if OP bought by description (he went in with an online reservation already made) then retailer is liable to put right the problem.

I don't think too many of us spend ages reading all of the detail on the box in order to ensure it is the right product nor should we be expected to.

Exactly!