Rainwater Tank 1100 Litre £1498.00now£50.00@B&Q smaller one also avail for same price

Lynsey

So some deals were cancelled as mis-prices????
Please, please say yes.

Lynsey

Lynsey

veruccasalt wrote: »

'bout 50 quid sounds reasonable, i would say.....:rolleyes:

If you have stock that's not moving then anything is a good price to get rid of them - these would have taken up space and if not selling taken up space where better selling items could be sitting.

Lynsey

frugalfran

It seems they were very organised here - publicity via local papers, local TV etc - and also getting organised so as to find out how many people had been affected. (If anyone can put pictures etc alongside my little ditty on YouTube, please feel free if you think it may help). They were also helped by the TS employee. It seems a shame that that case wasn't referrred to earlier (as far as I know) so that everyone who wants the tank could follow their example. Maybe it is all happening in the background....... Is it too late - any volunteers?

Pocoyo

I have added the following to my blog, some of us will be receiving court dates soon:


When your case is assigned to your local court you will be sent a short form to complete; follow the guidance on the reverse and you shouldn't have any problems with this.

The next step is for the court to request a copy of your "trial bundle". This consists of copies of the evidence you wish to present and a summary of the timeline of your case: order placed, order cancelled, subsequent communications between B&Q and yourself etc. Wait until the last moment (just like B&Q ) and send the pack by recorded delivery.

These are the documents you should include:

1) Copy of proof of purchase (Order confirmation email).

2) Copy of the cancellation email.

3) Copy of the Sale of Goods Act; you can print it off from here, highlight section 51 in the loudest highlighter you can find.

4) Copy of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

5) Include a copy of your complaint letter (a) and the reply from B&Q (b).

6) Search for the meaning of the term discretion and print it off. Highlight the second definition: "2. freedom or authority to make judgments and to act as one sees fit, at his discretion."

7) If you contacted trading standards, print off the email you sent (a) and the reply to it (b). In particular highlight their comments with regard to the Discretion clause.

8) A copy of both the old (a) and new (b) terms and conditions on the B&Q website. Highlight the section that states a contract is formed when a confirmation email is sent; highlight the discretion clause as well.

9) Copy of the same/similar item elsewhere for sale (demonstration of the loss of bargain).

You will then need to write a "witness statement". Write the story and introduce the evidence you are enclosing. Number each item of evidence from above which you are relying upon and refer to them by that reference.

The following is a template you may wish to adapt:

I purchased a Rainwater Argonaut, model number xxxxxx on XX June 09 for £50 plus £5 delivery charge. I paid for the item online, see Ref 1 for proof of payment.

I received an email confirmation; the defendant's terms and conditions at the time of purchase state "Upon payment, we will confirm acceptance of your order by e-mail which will be sent to the e-mail address you provide on your order details. Whether or not you receive the e-mail, our acceptance of your order will create a legally binding contract between us." I enclose a copy of the T&Cs in force at the time Ref 8a .The defendant has subsequently amended the T&Cs Ref 8b.

On xx/xx/09 I received an e-mail from B&Q Ref 2 stating that they were cancelling my order due to a lack of stock. The defendant states "they reserve the right to supply at discretion", however Collins Dictionary defines discretion as "freedom or authority to make judgments and to act as one sees fit, at his discretion" Ref 6. I would appeal to the court that the defendant, unable to fulfil orders due to a lack of stock, was unable to exercise discretion because this would imply the defendant had a choice. If there was no stock, there was only one outcome: a failure to fulfil the contract. The "Discretion" term could also be defined as unfair according to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations Ref 4.

I contacted Trading Standards on xx/xx/09 for assistance Ref 7a to which Trading Standards replied and had the following to say : (copy and paste from your personal Trading Standards e-mail) Ref 7b.

Section 51(e) of The sale of Goods Act Ref 3 states: (3) Where there is an available market for the goods in question the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods at the time or times when they ought to have been delivered or (if no time was fixed) at the time of the refusal to deliver.

I am therefore pursuing a claim against B&Q for loss of bargain for the amount of £xxx. The market price for the exact same model, excluding delivery is £xxx. Ref 9 I wrote to B&Q on xx/xx/09 requesting the 'loss of bargain' Ref 5a to which the defendant responded on xx/xx/09 where they reiterated their position and said were not willing to fulfil the order Ref 5b. On receiving this letter, I filed a claim against the defendant via moneyclaim.gov.uk.

In summary, when B&Q took payment and confirmed the order, by their own admission a legally binding contract was formed. The term discretion should not apply because the defendant had no choice whether to supply or not; they had no stock so they could not choose between more than one outcome. In addition, I would appeal that the discretion clause is an unfair term in accordance with the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

Lynsey

Thanks P, that will be a great help to others.
I also think evidence to prove B&Q have behaved negligent will also help. Issues since 2005 and still ongoing, or it was right up to the rainwater tank issue, and also ask to consider previous legal arguments/cases.

Lynsey

frugalfran

See B&Q are putting suppliers under pressure too -

http://www.hortweek.com/channel/OrnamentalsProduction/article/923699/Suppliers-will-continue-protest-B-Q-pay-deals-says-grower/

Gudge.

I received the B&Q defence this weekend. Their defence is basically that there was a stock level error (no mention of a pricing error). However BP then go on to say that I knew there was an 'error' from 'alerts' on the forums. How could anyone other than B&Q know how much stock they have and when they have a stock level error (OK, we could possibly guess when something is a misprice error, but not a stock level error surely). They then go on to quote forum members talking about possible 'pricing error', but how can that be relevant, given that they don't claim that there has been a pricing error either in their defence statement or previously. They go on to mention Hartog vs Colin and Shields, which is also to do with pricing errors so again is irrelevant since they don't claim a pricing error has occured. BP have used mispricing arguments, examples and quotes to defend something which is according to there defence, a stock level error issue ! Then they quote from the Dishwasher forum, so whats that got to do with me?, I have never ordered a dishwasher from B&Q. They also mention the 'Discretion not to supply' argument which B&Q have already previously failed to argue sucessfully in court. Overall I can't believe how amaturish this defence appears to be.

frugalfran

How do they propose to 'prove' in law that you were aware of what was happening on forums? Do they have the right to access your computer's history (in whidch case do we/you have the right to see their computers too - or are they relying on identifying individuals somehow (presumably I'll be the one who rhymes 'sue it' with 'B&Q it') !

Pocoyo

They seem to be under the misapprehension that the purpose of this and other sites is to alert consumers when there is a pricing error so people can pile in and order, then sue for loss of bargain.

It's funny, I've been on here for a few years now. I've had plenty of bargains but never been to the small claims court. I guess there's a first time for everything.

As far as proving who's who here, I think it's a question of trying to create guilt by association. Bond Pearce sent me a slew of quotes from this forum in their defense document; pity for them none of them were posted by me.

Lynsey

Pocoyo wrote: »

Bond Pearce sent me a slew of quotes from this forum in their defense document; pity for them none of them were posted by me.

What they didn't quote was ALL the quotes, only selected "tongue in cheek" quotes. Ask for ALL quotes to be produced.

Lynsey