Sale of Goods Act and companies in admnistration

TUC

When businesses such as Peacocks go into administration the administrations usually put up sign in stores stating that returns will no longer be accepted and/or claims regarding faulty goods should be sent to them to be treated like any other creditor.

However is this approach correct? My reading of section 48B (2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 is that it places a straightforward duty on the seller to repair, or as the case may be, replace the goods. This looks to be an entirely separate duty to the law regarding creditors and administration and I am unclear on what basis administrators are claiming the right to treat customers with returns as ordinary creditors.

What are the views of others on the position?

arcon5

A seller must offer a remedy: repair, replacement or refund. They are unable to repair or replace leaving the only option a refund -- meaning you are now a creditor of the company.

You are unlikely to get much money back once everythings been liquidated also.

What's the value? It may not even be worth bothering with it

wealdroam

TUC wrote: »

When businesses such as Peacocks go into administration the administrations usually put up sign in stores stating that returns will no longer be accepted and/or claims regarding faulty goods should be sent to them to be treated like any other creditor.

However is this approach correct? My reading of section 48B (2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 is that it places a straightforward duty on the seller to repair, or as the case may be, replace the goods. This looks to be an entirely separate duty to the law regarding creditors and administration and I am unclear on what basis administrators are claiming the right to treat customers with returns as ordinary creditors.

What are the views of others on the position?

Have you read MSE's Administration Help article?

Adminstrators cannot ignore their responsibilities.
If you were to look at, for example, Peacock's Administration faqs, you will see that they are not avoiding their statutory or contractual responsibilities.
They state that they are still honouring the 28 day return policy, but only for exchange... no refunds. Nothing wrong with that.

They do seem to have 'overlooked' the refund requirements of the Distance Selling Regulations, but note the sentence...

This does not affect your statutory rights.