Sale of Goods Act

tiesys

Hi,

Opinions would be appreciated.

I bought a suit from a well know high street retailer on the 31/5/2011. when I bought it I made it quite clear that I wanted:-

1) A hard wearing business suit that could be worn everyday
2) A suit that would not crease easily

After trying the jacket on and being measured for the trousers, I bought the suit and took it home. A week later I took it to a more local branch of the same retailer to have the trousers shortened. I picked the suit up a week later.

I then wore the suit for the first time on the 16/6/2011 for a total of less than 2.5 hours and when I returned home noticed the trousers were badly creased around the backs of the kness and the waist band area looked like it had been crushed and the creases looked like they had been ironed in they were that bad.

I took the suit back a couple of days later to the local branch who sent it offto Head Office.

They wrote back saying the suit conformed to British Standards and there was nothing wrong.

I informed them that as far as I was concerned, this had nothing to do with BS, but as I made my request clear at the point of sale, the Sale of Goods Act would dictate that the suit:-

1) Was not as described
2) Was not of satisfactory quality
3) Was not Fit for purpose
4) Did not Conform to contract
5) Did not Last a reasonable length of time

As can imagine, they have told me that they will not refund my monies and I have threatened taking them to the Small Claims Court.

Anyone any idea on whether who is in the right here?

My argument is that as I specified I wanted a "suit that would not crease easily", and the suit (after less than 2.5 hours wear), looked appaling, it simply is not fit for purpose nor as described??

Comments would be appreciated.

Thanks

Mike

stugib

Always difficult trying to apply arguments to completely subjective factors.

fluffnutter

It's a difficult one. Small claims court might well be your only redress. Like stugib says, it's all rather subjective. I'd expect most work attire to be fairly crumpled after a couple of hours wear unless you use those weird 60s materials like Comfylux which are essentially indestructible plastic. Only problem is you'd sweat like a pig and die.

Techhead_2

A creased waistband and knee folds are signs that the trousers are too close fitting (no offence). Whether that's because of the style or sizing issues I can't say. But you'll need some evidence to counter theirs.

InsideInsurance

Can you realistically evidence that you gave your requirements and that the store proposed this item as meeting your requirements?

The second challenge is going to be, as has already been pointed out, the fact that everything you are talking about is subjective both in terms of your requirements and in terms of the issues with the item.

You could take it to the small track of the county court if you wanted but its going to be fairly hit or miss on who wins. Start off by sending a letter before action.

scheming_gypsy

tiesys wrote: »

I informed them that as far as I was concerned, this had nothing to do with BS, but as I made my request clear at the point of sale, the Sale of Goods Act would dictate that the suit:-

1) Was not as described
2) Was not of satisfactory quality
3) Was not Fit for purpose
4) Did not Conform to contract
5) Did not Last a reasonable length of time

1 - was it described as a suit and is it a suit?
2 - is there anything wrong with the quality or isn't it to your requirements?
3 - did it cover your naked body?
4 - did you have a contract ?
5 - it's creased not torn.


From what you've said you only asked a salesman if it was x, y and z but the suit is as described... it's a suit