If not Loss of Bargain, what are our rights?

somethingcorporate

Move on, life is too short.

Do you really expect a judge to ask the company to hand over £100 without a sale? I just don't think it will work or be worth the effort...

Flyboy152

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Move on, life is too short.

Do you really expect a judge to ask the company to hand over £100 without a sale? I just don't think it will work or be worth the effort...

I thought that was the principal of "Loss of Bargain."

lucy03

McKneff wrote: »

No chance, you are back to where you were before the thing was ordered.

You have not suffered any loss.

There is a chance, although both cases I saw go to court failed, but others may have a wider experience. The dispute isn't over whether there has been a loss, it's about putting both parties back in a position where they were before the contract.

Personally, I wouldn't advise court action, I think it's rather risky and would potentially be a substantial amount of work and stress. There are factors relating to the contract itself, and definitions over which party did what and when. The involvement of a third party just makes the matter more complex, it doesn't relieve the seller of responsibility.

vaio

I thought the principle (and whole point) of a contract was that, once agreed, the parties are bound by it subject to any fair cancellation terms contained within it.

In this case, the buyer must pay the agreed amount and the seller must provide the agreed machine and if either party decides not to fulfil their side then the contract should be enforceable via the courts if necessary.

So, if the buyer sourced a similar (preferably identical) machine from an alternative supplier then the seller is liable for any additional costs incurred subject to the general duty to mitigate costs.

somethingcorporate

Have we ever seen any genuine cases where compensation for loss of bargain has ever occurred on this consumer rights forum?

In my 3+ years posting here I've not seen a single one where the retailer has been forced to hand over any difference in cost.

We've not even had anyone come back and lie about it happening!

peachyprice

Not even from Sirmarcus, and if anyone was likely to..........

kennyfong

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Have we ever seen any genuine cases where compensation for loss of bargain has ever occurred on this consumer rights forum?

In my 3+ years posting here I've not seen a single one where the retailer has been forced to hand over any difference in cost.

We've not even had anyone come back and lie about it happening!

Is it not a legally sound argument though, that if a contract is formed then expectation damages / specific performance can be obtained?

Assuming a contract is formed [e.g. t&c states contract is formed on despatch, and OP says he has received confirmation of despatch] - then there has been a subsequent breach and repudiation by the seller. The buyer can claim for damages. Contract is not tort; the seller can't just "refund" and put the seller back to the positon they were in before buying - the buyer also has a right to sue for expectation damages.

Is there a disconnect between law and reality here?

arcon5

This guy claims to have won

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4164713

Although slightly different scenario.

Equaliser123

McKneff wrote: »

No chance, you are back to where you were before the thing was ordered.

You have not suffered any loss.

Being put back to the position pre-contract isn't sufficient for a breach of contract remedy.

somethingcorporate

That madbid is a slightly different case but probably the only similar-ish one I have ever seen on this CR forums.

I do think there is a disconnect between law and reality but that's life. If the OP wants to make something of it then good luck to them and I'd love to see evidence that this could in fact happen.