M&S sale of goods act

arcon5

I don't think a witness would be sufficient proof tbh.

Did you know the date/time it was purchased? just wondering how they managed to locate the transaction.

brodev

arcon5 wrote: »

I don't think a witness would be sufficient proof tbh.

Trading Standards disagree

Equaliser123

arcon5 wrote: »

I don't think a witness would be sufficient proof tbh.

Did you know the date/time it was purchased? just wondering how they managed to locate the transaction.

A witness is good evidence. Trouble is - a witness can be cross-examined at a trial if it ever got that far.

However, evidentially, if I say that I bought something on a certain day and paid £x then that is evidence. It could be discredited, it could be challenged. However, a Court could accept my account was probably correct.

A receipt cannot be challenged in the same way and is clearly more persuasive.

arcon5

brodev wrote: »

Trading Standards disagree

Maybe, but try find any retailer that would deal with you where your proof of purchase is an unknown person. Also trying to convince a judge this person is credible wouldn't be a particularly easy task -- especially where the defendant discredited them in any way.

fozmcfc

wealdroam wrote: »

Sorry, I missed the relevance of this bit?

Well it made a change from disabled I suppose.:cool:

Equaliser123

arcon5 wrote: »

Maybe, but try find any retailer that would deal with you where your proof of purchase is an unknown person. Also trying to convince a judge this person is credible wouldn't be a particularly easy task -- especially where the defendant discredited them in any way.

To be honest, just about every litigation I have been involved in comes down to one person's word against the other.

Ultimately, the retailer would have real problem discrediting a witness unless they could provide some compelling facts. Frankly, I don't think they would bother.

ThumbRemote

wealdroam wrote: »

Sorry, I missed the relevance of this bit?

I presume it's relevant to the OP. There could be many reasons; two that come to mind immediately are that OAPs tend to have less money so the cost of a faulty item means more to them, and often they are less assertive than younger people.

arcon5

ThumbRemote wrote: »

I presume it's relevant to the OP. There could be many reasons; two that come to mind immediately are that OAPs tend to have less money so the cost of a faulty item means more to them, and often they are less assertive than younger people.

Both poor generalisations.

Many younger people, single parents, families suffered fromr edundancies have little to no disposable income and struggling to make ends meet. You can just generalise that OAPs have less money than the rest of society! Infact I know so many elderly people who are infact quite wealthy but prudent with money.

Actually in my experience many OAPs are more willing to complain. When you look at the other end of the spectrum you have your teenagers and young adults who are perhaps shy or lack confidence or many people that don't like confrontation.
To generalsie that younger people are more assertive is hell of a claim.


The fact she is an OAP plays no relevance to the task at hand!

wealdroam

ThumbRemote wrote: »

I presume it's relevant to the OP. There could be many reasons; two that come to mind immediately are that OAPs tend to have less money so the cost of a faulty item means more to them, and often they are less assertive than younger people.

You may be right.
On the other hand...

But as I said earlier... I missed the relevance.

mountainofdebt

wealdroam wrote: »

You may be right.
On the other hand...

But as I said earlier... I missed the relevance.

I took it as an attempt to win the sympathy vote