Sent the wrong item

bod1467

I presume your question is rhetorical? We all know Flyboy won't provide a direct, clear response.

ETA: the answer clearly was Yes. :rotfl:

The DSRs allows the consumer to do so
Really? You're 100% sure of this? You have evidence to support this claim?

Valli

I posted the link to Consumer Direct because that is to whom the OP should be directing his query. OP has complicated the manner by USING the goods (well, attempting to) rather than merely opening the package and inspecting them. Which has complicated this matter.

Sellers made a mistake; they sent the wrong goods. They could have had their goods back, in resaleable condtion, had the OP noticed this before opening the pack - they'd have lost on postage though. Now, however OP wants to return an opened pack less three discs for a full refund...but that's not what they sent, so they seller isn't happy. Goods themselves aren't faulty - they're not the ordered goods. Advice from us, on here, however, isn't going to hold any water. OP needs 'proper' advice.

George_Michael

Whetehr a shop would or not is neither here nor there.

Best you call the OFT and advise them that their guidance notes are incorrect then.

I presume your question is rhetorical?

Sort of. I really wanted to see how long Flyboy could ignore such a simple question for.

ThumbRemote

Valli wrote: »

My understanding of this situation is that, having USED the discs you are now deemed to have accepted them.

But do feel free to verify this here

The OP is unable to have accepted the goods. The goods specified in the contract have not been supplied, so the contract cannot have been concluded.

The OP has potentially not taken the requisite duty of care to the goods that were supplied; however given the retailer couldn't spot from the packaging that the wrong goods were sent, it seems excusable that the OP dodn't spot it either.

wealdroam

Flyboy152 wrote: »

But then:

34 Buyer’s right of examining the goods.

• F33. . .
• Unless otherwise agreed, when the seller tenders delivery of goods to the buyer, he is bound on request to afford the buyer a reasonable opportunity of examining the goods for the purpose of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract [F34and, in the case of a contract for sale by sample, of comparing the bulk with the sample.].

I would've expected the first part of "examining the goods" to be something like looking at the label.

That is all that was needed to discover that the seller had sent the wrong product.

Don't you agree, Flyboy?

Flyboy152

wealdroam wrote: »

I would've expected the first part of "examining the goods" to be something like looking at the label.

That is all that was needed to discover that the seller had sent the wrong product.

Don't you agree, Flyboy?

No.

According the OFT's own guidance, he is allowed to test the goods.

The right to refund and the condition of the goods are separate issues.

Do you agree, Wealdroam?

wealdroam

Flyboy152 wrote: »

No.

According the OFT's own guidance, he is allowed to test the goods.

The right to refund and the condition of the goods are separate issues.

Do you agree, Wealdroam?

What?

You don't think that inspecting the goods involves looking at the packaging?

We all know, including you and the OP, that there are many products that are CD shaped... CDs, single density DVDs, printable DVDs, double density... etc. etc.

Common sense tells me to look at the label before opening.
But apparently that's just me.

Incidently, on page 2 of the OFT's guide it says...

1.4 Please note that this is only a general guide and you should not regard it as a statement of how the law applies in every situation. If you are unsure about how the DSRs apply to the circumstances of your particular business then you should consult the regulations or a legal advisor.

Edited to add:
Re the earlier quote from the OFT's guide...

The DSRs allow consumers to examine goods they have ordered as they would in a shop. If that requires opening the packaging and trying out the goods then they have not breached their duty to take reasonable care of the goods.

Note that the consumer is allowed to examine the goods as they would in a shop.

The next sentence starts with the word If.

That means that if they could examine the goods in a shop by opening the packaging, then they are allowed to do so under DSRs.

I think we all know that opening a pack of DVDs in a shop would be frowned upon, at least.

halibut2209

ThumbRemote wrote: »

however given the retailer couldn't spot from the packaging that the wrong goods were sent, it seems excusable that the OP dodn't spot it either.

This is an excellent point, and is more than likely the point that would win a case in the small claims court.

shaun_from_Africa

however given the retailer couldn't spot from the packaging that the wrong goods were sent, it seems excusable that the OP dodn't spot it either

It might not be that they couldn't, simply that they didn't.
One word, but that one word could determine the outcome of any legal action.

There might have been one packet of DVDs out of dozens or maybe hundreds that was in the wrong place, so someone not noticing the label is possible.
However, the OP only had a single package to examine when they received their delivery so an incorrect item should have been easier to spot.

Flyboy152

wealdroam wrote: »

What?

You don't think that inspecting the goods involves looking at the packaging?

We all know, including you and the OP, that there are many products that are CD shaped... CDs, single density DVDs, printable DVDs, double density... etc. etc.

Common sense tells me to look at the label before opening.
But apparently that's just me.

Incidently, on page 2 of the OFT's guide it says...
Edited to add:
Re the earlier quote from the OFT's guide...
Note that the consumer is allowed to examine the goods as they would in a shop.

The next sentence starts with the word If.

That means that if they could examine the goods in a shop by opening the packaging, then they are allowed to do so under DSRs.

I think we all know that opening a pack of DVDs in a shop would be frowned upon, at least.

You can interpret the word "IF" as much as you like, the OFT's giudelines are what the judiciary use when deciding on such things.

But then, it doesn't really matter, because:

The right to refund and the condition of the goods are separate issues.

Do you agree, Wealdroam?