can i have my money back?

somethingcorporate

bookworm1363 wrote: »

:rotfl:Well, this would be funny if it wasn't so bad.

Trying to play who's got the biggest ego, bless. You win, you definitely have the biggest ego. As for the rest, you are so mistaken that I don't know where to start, but I'll try.

Nothing to do with ego, just trying to provide the OP with their actual position, not the fiction you appear to be coming up with.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

You need to get out more.

Caselaw: WS Karoulias v The Drambuie Liqueur Company Ltd.

Lord Clarke concluded that "(...)the law still provides that parties to a complete agreement might stipulate for themselves, either expressly, or
impliedly, when, and under what circumstances, the terms of the agreement will be binding in law. They may indeed do so to produce the kind of certainty that avoids disputes about what was agreed between them".

But NOT completed. Which is what I have been saying, highlighting and repeating. What part of "not completed" was unclear to you?

What? how does that say only binding upon completion? The terms of a contract are binding at agreement. This was done when the OP AGREED to purchase the shoes from the retailer.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

Accounting for the insane! :rotfl:

Unless seller shuts down shop and on final stocktaking finds that she has a pair of X sized shoes left, and NEVER sold another pair of shoes of that same size since our OP cancelled, ONLY at that point would she have suffered a true loss. Genuine pre-estimate of loss doesn't cover for "well, I COULD have sold more pairs". It's actual losses that get compensated, not guesswork based on how many more pairs she might or might not sell. There's plenty of case law to support that as well.

Fair point.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

Awww bless, can't you actually respond without insults or snidey comments? Doesn't do much for your credibility I'm afraid.

Anyway, you can presumably show me caselaw to support THAT little gem? About the different set of rules?

The different set of rules that I referred to were the Distance Selling Regulations, governing sales done at a distance (telephone, internet etc).

I find it ironic you cannot see the difference between ordering something online and buying something from a shop, especially when you have been advising others on it on this very forum!

bookworm1363 wrote: »

Because what you're saying is that you turn up to the till with a £5 TV instead of £500 you've picked off the shelf, they will HAVE to sell it to you? Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear , oh dear. :rotfl:

No, where do you get that magic from? I was making the distinction between Distance Selling (from which the DSG rules apply) to buying in a shop (as per the OPs situation) which is governed by the SOGA only.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

Hmmm, funny, explain gazumping, please? "committed" yes. But if one of the parties cancels, the other side STILL can only recover their losses, and only if they signed a contract stipulating what those would be.

Gazumping happens pre-exchange of contracts, not post.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

You got ONE correct at last. Well, partly correct, only applies to business to consumer, not B2B, but since this one of those cases, I won't be too hard on you for not being specific.

bookworm1363 wrote: »

At LAST a valid bit of advice!!!

It goes without saying that people should ALWAYS do their own research before acting on advice given over the Internet. Still, no harm in repeating it.

"somethingcorporate", any chance your name indicates as to where your loyalties lay, hence explaining that, erm, "interesting" take on this type of case?

No, it refers to a name of a band.

Honestly, where do you get your info from?

Freddie_Snowbits

bookworm1363 wrote: »

And presumably, instead of your usual OPINION, you can prove this?

What Consumer
http://whatconsumer.co.uk/what-are-my-statutory-rights/

Some facts

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html

Which

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-goods/understanding-the-sale-of-goods-act/your-rights/

Any more?

Freddie_Snowbits

Oh and about contracts

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/buying-services/how-to-cancel-a-contract/your-rights/


Madam did responds across this post

bookworm1363

Freddie_Snowbits wrote: »

Any more?

OOops, sorry, forgot who I was talking to here. :rotfl:

Any RELEVANT case law?

Apart from quoting SOGA over and over again (tip: all your 3 links relate to the same Statutory Instrument, the complete legal text of which can actually be found HERE), any case law that actually addresses any of the issues this OP has? Or maybe you can point out to me where I said that this case is governed by SOGA? Because unless I have made a typo, I am pretty sure I said SOGA DOESN'T apply (yet).

Freddie_Snowbits

bookworm1363 wrote: »

OOops, sorry, forgot who I was talking to here. :rotfl:

Any RELEVANT case law?

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/buying-services/how-to-cancel-a-contract/your-rights/

I also posted across yours

midget_gems

this thread amuses me because at the end of the day, its turned into a huge legal battle of contractual law over a pair of dance shoes.

I'm betting the op goes back to the shop, goes "I'm sorry, a credit note is not useful to me. can i have a refund?" and the nice lady at the shop goes "Yes."

...or the nice lady at the shop says "no, sorry." at which point the op finally sees an excuse to treat herself to a nice pair of new shoes. or treat her daughter to a nice new lovely pair of dance shoes for christmas that have been paid for anyway.

hey op, enjoy your new shoes.

somethingcorporate

bookworm1363 wrote: »

OOops, sorry, forgot who I was talking to here. :rotfl:

Any RELEVANT case law?

Apart from quoting SOGA over and over again (tip: all your 3 links relate to the same Statutory Instrument, the complete legal text of which can actually be found HERE, any case law that actually addresses any of the issues this OP has? Or maybe you can point out to me where I said that this case is governed by SOGA? Because unless I have made a typo, I am pretty sure I said SOGA DOESN'T apply (yet).

On what basis doesn't it apply? Is it from the same legal source that says contracts are only binding at completion?

Dave101t

point is, the receipt doesnt say 'pre-order' or 'deposit only' does it? its a sales receipt.
the sale stands, you can get a credit note and be glad of that!

of course the sensible thing to do it wait until they are in, then say 'i dont want them' and not to pay upfront.

ive made this mistake once too, but its a learning curve. never pay unless you absolutely have to before being given goods.

Freddie_Snowbits

In the end, OP agreed to purchase a pair of shoes at a price of £43. The seller made a commitment to delvier these items at some date in the future, though they do hold the OPs monies. In essence the contract will conclude on satisfactory delivery of the shoes.

Therefor, OPs rights are only those in the SOGA.

One fears madam does not understand this part of contract law

shaun_from_Africa

Because the company's T&Cs clearly state what are the scales of refunding/no refunding, and a consumer agrees to these when he purchases the goods.

But if a company's T&C are in breech of UK law then those T&C's are invalid and legally unenforcable.
So if what you say is correct in that the contract has not been concluded and the OP is legally entitled to a full refund because they have not received their shoes, then the same conditions must apply to the examples that I gave. (flights and holidays).

Even if a customer agrees to a term in a contract, they can not sign away their statutory rights.