We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Do I have a right to cancel my sofa order?

DBS1
Posts: 5 Forumite
Can anyone help us.
Approx ten days ago, we ordered a sofa, chair and footstool from a big chain. We have not as yet taken delivery which is due in the next three weeks.
Prior to us placing the order,the store did not have the specific two seater we were interested in and the salesman suggested that testing (for comfort) the three seater version was sufficient for us to make a purchase decision.
We tested the three seater which we told him was too soft for us. He stated that the two seater would be much firmer because the three seater had lost its firmness due to customers sitting on it.
I have subsequently spoken to an upholsterer and a furniture manufacturer who both agree that the three seater would not lose its firmness as a result of a few customers sitting on it in store over a few weeks. They also agreed that the two seater will probably feel as soft and uncomfortable as the three seater we tested in store.
We have been advised by the store that we are unable to cancel as we signed a purchase agreement for a sofa made to our specification (standard sofa...we just selected a different colour) and which is a legally binding contract.
We feel we have been mislead by the salesman and were not given the opportunity to test the specific model we wanted.
As we were not able to see or test the sofa in store and were not offered the opportunity to do so would this be classed as distance selling and be covered by those regulations?..especially as we still not had the sofa delivered
If not, would we have a right to cancel base on the fact the sofa was misdescribed by the salesman?
If they did agree with our issues regarding the sofa could they force us to proceed with the purchase of the other items ordered (matching chair and footstool) on the basis that we had the opportunity to test these in store? Without the matching sofa, these items would be useless to us.
We hope someone can help us with this as we don't want to waste our hard cash on a sofa that we find uncomfortable to sit on.
Approx ten days ago, we ordered a sofa, chair and footstool from a big chain. We have not as yet taken delivery which is due in the next three weeks.
Prior to us placing the order,the store did not have the specific two seater we were interested in and the salesman suggested that testing (for comfort) the three seater version was sufficient for us to make a purchase decision.
We tested the three seater which we told him was too soft for us. He stated that the two seater would be much firmer because the three seater had lost its firmness due to customers sitting on it.
I have subsequently spoken to an upholsterer and a furniture manufacturer who both agree that the three seater would not lose its firmness as a result of a few customers sitting on it in store over a few weeks. They also agreed that the two seater will probably feel as soft and uncomfortable as the three seater we tested in store.
We have been advised by the store that we are unable to cancel as we signed a purchase agreement for a sofa made to our specification (standard sofa...we just selected a different colour) and which is a legally binding contract.
We feel we have been mislead by the salesman and were not given the opportunity to test the specific model we wanted.
As we were not able to see or test the sofa in store and were not offered the opportunity to do so would this be classed as distance selling and be covered by those regulations?..especially as we still not had the sofa delivered
If not, would we have a right to cancel base on the fact the sofa was misdescribed by the salesman?
If they did agree with our issues regarding the sofa could they force us to proceed with the purchase of the other items ordered (matching chair and footstool) on the basis that we had the opportunity to test these in store? Without the matching sofa, these items would be useless to us.
We hope someone can help us with this as we don't want to waste our hard cash on a sofa that we find uncomfortable to sit on.
0
Comments
-
Have you paid? Are you yet to pay (in full)? Or have you signed a credit agreement to pay in instalments/at a later date?"Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.0
-
I doubt you'll get anywhere.You tested a 3 seater sofa you found uncomfortable yet still ordered one in a 2 seater option.The one you sat on had been on display so getting similar use to what it would expect it to get at home.It sounds like the salesman just talked you into buying it and you let him
.
0 -
Distnce selliing regulations are just that and not applicable.
A sofa would have so much more use in a house that in a showroom so this is a pretty poor selling point. But I doubt you will get out of this one. Your due diligence should be done BEFORE comitting to purchasing the item.0 -
skiddlydiddly wrote: »I doubt you'll get anywhere.You tested a 3 seater sofa you found uncomfortable yet still ordered one in a 2 seater option.The one you sat on had been on display so getting similar use to what it would expect it to get at home.It sounds like the salesman just talked you into buying it and you let him
.
On the advice of the salesman; the professional "expert."
If the salesman lied, the product could be considered to have been missold. I very much doubt, as has already been pointed out, that the sofa will have got as much use as, say, a years worth of wear, in the store.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
If a salesman told me that a sofa had gone soft due to people sitting on it, then I would have run a mile, as having 2 seats rather than 3 isn't going to make any difference!!
If you genuinely feel you have been misled, then put it in writing and see if they'll let you choose something else instead.Should've = Should HAVE (not 'of')
Would've = Would HAVE (not 'of')
No, I am not perfect, but yes I do judge people on their use of basic English language. If you didn't know the above, then learn it! (If English is your second language, then you are forgiven!)0 -
fluffnutter wrote: »Have you paid? Are you yet to pay (in full)? Or have you signed a credit agreement to pay in instalments/at a later date?
We have not paid anything yet but have signed up to interest free credit and signed an agreement with payments to start after Delivery which is due on 7th July0 -
The first thing to do is to formally cancel the order in writing explaining the exact reasons for your decision, irrespective of what the store has told you. You cannot proceed with anything until you have done this.
You could ask the upholsterers you have consulted, to give an expert opinion in writing, to back up your claim.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
The difficulty will be in proving that you bought the sofa specifically on the salesperson's advice, or even that he said those things at all. However, this is still your reason for cancellation. Did you feel pressured into the sale? That's a reason for cancellation too. Give it a go, in writing, stating your reasons."Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.0
-
fluffnutter wrote: »The difficulty will be in proving that you bought the sofa specifically on the salesperson's advice, or even that he said those things at all. However, this is still your reason for cancellation. Did you feel pressured into the sale? That's a reason for cancellation too. Give it a go, in writing, stating your reasons.
Seeing as it will be the retailer who will litigating for the money, would the onus not be on the retailer to prove that their salesman always tells the truth?The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
Seeing as it will be the retailer who will litigating for the money, would the onus not be on the retailer to prove that their salesman always tells the truth?
One would hope so, but I doubt it works like that in practice."Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards