Do I have a right to compensation

Equaliser123

gordikin wrote: »

They do not have to eat out though.

No but as a matter of law, they are entitled to be put into the position they would have been in had the contract been performed correctly - i.e. with either the ability to cook using an oven or to obtain meals elsewhere.

Subject of course to an obligation to mitigate losses.

fluffnutter

Equaliser123 wrote: »

... or to obtain meals elsewhere...

Indeed - in another part of the kitchen, using the hob or microwave.

Not having an oven does not automatically equal 'therefore, I must eat in restaurants'. There are other more realistic alternatives. If my freezer didn't work I wouldn't rush out to eat in restaurants expecting the company I bought it from to reimburse me. No, I'd use food from the fridge like a normal person.

If my shower broke I wouldn't charge the company for expensive trips to my local gym just to take advantage of their shower facilities. No, I'd have a bath.

shaun_from_Africa

A few layers of kitchen foil taped over the door opening may well work for one or two meals.
I wouldn't fancy doing it long term, but if you have something in the fridge that needs baking before it goes off, this might just do it.

Equaliser123

fluffnutter wrote: »

Not having an oven does not automatically equal 'therefore, I must eat in restaurants'. There are other more realistic alternatives. If my freezer didn't work I wouldn't rush out to eat in restaurants expecting the company I bought it from to reimburse me. No, I'd use food from the fridge like a normal person.

Didn't say that. If it is reasonable in all of the circumstances, then yes, it is claimable.

arcon5

Heres some meals that don't require an oven:


Chilli con carne with rice
Casserole
Pasta bolognese
Stir fries with noodles or rice
Curry with rice
Steak with potatoe & peas
Pie in microwave with pasta, rice, potato
Quiche with potato, peas and gravy
Jacked potatoes with beans & salad
Steak & potato
Omelette
Sausage fried
Ham salad
Fajitas
ect
ect
ect
ect
ect
ect

fluffnutter wrote: »

Of course, you can also get compensation for distress but if being without an oven for a short while distresses you to the point you need financially recompensing, then it might we worth spending any compo you get on some therapy to toughen you up!

:T

It's not the end of the world. Its not like shes going without hot water or electricity or something -- these things happen!! Its not like her life has halted in anyway! Its only been 5days!

hcb42

It would be one pot meals for me, or salads, as I dont have a microwave.:eek: But there is plenty of options there.

Equaliser123

arcon5 wrote: »

It's not the end of the world. Its not like shes going without hot water or electricity or something -- these things happen!! Its not like her life has halted in anyway! Its only been 5days!

Don't think anybody said it is the end of the world...

At law, she is entitled to compensation for losses flowing from the breach. With respect, posting recipes isn't going to change that.

arcon5

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Don't think anybody said it is the end of the world...

At law, she is entitled to compensation for losses flowing from the breach. With respect, posting recipes isn't going to change that.

With or without an oven she has to eat so what losses will she have incurrred?

Just because she doesn't have an oven doesn't mean anymore has to be spent on food.

Most food that you cook in an oven can be cooked using other means anyway. Anything else can be put in the freezer.

pulliptears

OP, why dont you buy yourself a cheap Halogen Oven? They can be found for as little as £20 in B&M or £29.99 in TJ Hughes.

http://www.tjhughes.co.uk/fcp/product/brands-for-less//Elgento-7L-Halogen-Oven/949

This will tide you over, and to be honest I haven't used my regular oven since I bought one of these.

real1314

Yet again the "No you can't have compensation" brigade come out.

In this case the OP has paid for a product which they are now unable to use. Do some of you think that suppliers should be able to supply defective goods with no come-back?

The OP is losing:-

The facility they paid for.
The use of the cash they spent on the item.

The supplier has gained:-
Cash for a defective item.

I'd say smeg should be supplying a temporary replacement if it is feasible to do so.
Otherwise, some sort of financial compo for the inconvenience. :cool: