Any legal eagles out there?

Hintza

Sold an electrical item in May as Display Stock with full 1 year warranty and I offer a 7 day returns service.

Buyer contacted me after 6 days to say that after the free trial period (eh??!!) they would like to return the item as it didn't meet their needs. I told them that it wasn't a trial period but a chance to examine goods and return if not working or not as described and couldn't help them. They admitted that there was nothing wrong with the item.

After a while I started to get e-mails suggesting that the it wasn't working properly and listed a couple of faults (this was early June); I told them if it was faulty to return the item and I would send it to the manufacturers repairer under warranty (by now we are into July). Item appears a week or so later and is sent to repairer.

I get the estimate back stating that the item will cost £90 to fix and has been damaged due to ingress of water and is not repairable under warranty.

I contacted my buyer and told them that the item had suffered water damage and that if they paid for the repair I would sort it out. Needless to say I am now being quoted the sale of goods act and they will be taking out an action in the Smallls Claims court.

They now want the item returned at my expense. I have told them that in light of the present situation that I will be leaving at the repairer until the matter is resolved and that in any case as I now believe it is a fradulent claim they would have to arrange collection of the item as I was unwilling to incur further expense in the matter.

How to proceed now?

apprentice_tycoon

I can't help at all except to say that (as a layman) I don't think that you've put a foot wrong

bleugh

you've nothing to worry about!

to cover yourself you can simply post / fax them a copy of the report along witrh the manufacturers warranty, highlighting the bit about non cover with water ingress

mcwarre

bleugh wrote:

you've nothing to worry about!

to cover yourself you can simply post / fax them a copy of the report along witrh the manufacturers warranty, highlighting the bit about non cover with water ingress

Make sure you sent it recorded. They are utter chancers. Unless I am mistaken the sale of goods act doesn't cover private auctions.........

zappahey

mcwarre wrote:

Make sure you sent it recorded. They are utter chancers. Unless I am mistaken the sale of goods act doesn't cover private auctions.........

What do you mean by private auctions and how do they relate to ebay?

bleugh

sale of goods act only applies to retail situations.

i.e. you buy something from currys, etc

an auction is a transaction between two individuals, much like you'd go to loot.com or ad-trader / free-ads, or even ringing someone on a card you saw in the sales bit in asda

basically, it's tough luck mr buyer

of course, you've offered a warranty,and accepted it back for an offer of a warranty repair. the fact they've invalidated the warranty means you have no obligations at all, other than the official repair costs

i'm not a legal person, but i've been here before :-)

Hintza

Just to follow up:-

I have sent them a copy of the report. Will need

Thw buyer wanted it sent recorded anyway. Do you think I am obliged to return it at my expense?

Item was sold on Amazon Marketplace. I believe I am covered by the sale of goods act and treat buyers as such. My general rule of thumb is if a customer wishes to return an item I would expect it to be in an unused condition and do not generally cause a fuss about it. Mainly to avoid situations like this. It cost me quite a lot but in terms of sales and feedback is worth it.

The reason I refused the initial return were the words "Seven day free trial period" the buyer also intimated that they had bought a better item elsewhere and as you can imagine the cost to me in having a now secondhand item returned would have been quite onerous in terms of resale value.

zappahey

bleugh wrote:

sale of goods act only applies to retail situations.

i.e. you buy something from currys, etc

Not true but consumers have additional rights under SOGA. http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?r.l3=1074027367&r.l2=1074400662&r.t=RESOURCES&r.i=1073792526&r.l1=1073861169&r.s=m&type=RESOURCES&itemId=1073792527

an auction is a transaction between two individuals, much like you'd go to loot.com or ad-trader / free-ads, or even ringing someone on a card you saw in the sales bit in asda

According to Birmingham TS, an auction is a public sale where goods are sold to the highest bidder, which suggests that there is no such things as a private auction and certainly does not agree with any of your examples, all of which are conventional offers to treat.

basically, it's tough luck mr buyer

Agreed, but solely because of the water ingress. Reading the OP's post suggests that he is buying for resale and, if so, then SOGA and the Distance Selling Regulations would certainly apply.

IMHO, the OP has handled everything correctly and my only concern is that he may be exposing himself to liability by not retrieving the goods from the repairer. The repairer could reasonably demand storage costs. Plus if the repairer disposes of the uncollected item then the OP could be liable for replacement, bearing in mind that there is no contract between the customer and the repairer.

soolin

According to Birmingham TS, an auction is a public sale where goods are sold to the highest bidder, which suggests that there is no such things as a private auction and certainly does not agree with any of your examples, all of which are conventional offers to treat.

The difference here though being that strangely enough ebay transactions are not deemed to be auctions, they are private sales as bleugh suggested. Ebay is not an auction house, despite what it calls itself, and is therefore treated merely as a marketplace, like a free newspaper where it is buyers beware.

Soo

Hintza

zappahey wrote:

IMHO, the OP has handled everything correctly and my only concern is that he may be exposing himself to liability by not retrieving the goods from the repairer. The repairer could reasonably demand storage costs. Plus if the repairer disposes of the uncollected item then the OP could be liable for replacement, bearing in mind that there is no contract between the customer and the repairer.

Thanks zapphahey..I don't think I will have a problem with the repairer. I have a good working relationship with them. My reasoning was that if this does go to court the item is in the best place for any assesement required to prove any dmage was intentional. I don't want a buyer saying I have damaged the goods to duck my responsibilities!

buggu

If it was a brand new item it would have to have been fit for it purposes and last a reasonable period of time depending on the item. For second hand items so long as the description you left for the item was accurate with nothing to imply something which isnt true then you have no problems. In this case you have written evidence from i presume a good repairer that the item was faulty due to misuse and since you gave the purchaser ample opportunity to test the item and return the item if they found it to been faulty before they recieved it should mean they wont have a leg to stand on in court. Basically they would have to show the item was either faulty before they got it and that they didnt have enought time to test it or that the item became faulty durning normal use. In both situations you have covered yourself. I wouldnt worry too much and just stick to them paying for its return but make sure you have the documents form the repairer and more importantly the item in its current condition.