Sooo, I bought a bed online ...

unholyangel

Their website T&C's make them look like a bit cowboyish....


Theres terms saying they cant accept returns on items which have been exposed to air due to hygiene restrictions, that you accept the goods unless you sign for them as damaged (and it even has a part that you MUST accept delivery), another that apparently allows them to assign without consent, another which gives them powers of bailiffs by allowing them to use "reasonable force" to enter and reclaim goods, that allows them to make deductions where the original packaging hasnt been used, and that tries to restrict liability that they cannot restrict in consumer contracts.

All of those are wrong.

Kevin_M_2

Well, I sent the email (with ThumbRemote's suggested amendments) and here's the response:

Dear Kevin

AS a gesture of goodwill we will send you a replacement side rail which will arrive with us by the end of next week

you can if you wish use the bed until you receive your replacement side rail and we do not require the problematic one back

Hmm ... backtracking much?

I am formulating my reply as we speak and will post it here.

Kevin_M_2

Well, here's my reply (I haven't sent it yet):

Hi Louise,

I am very sorry but it's too late for that. A replacement part is what I originally requested, but you refused that request outright and instead attempted to make me pay for something which I should not have to. This is an unacceptable way to treat a customer.

Therefore, as per The Sale of Goods Act 1979, I am rejecting the item due to it being damaged and request that you collect the item and refund the sum paid to you of £159. I will be sending a formal request letter via recorded post, as well a .pdf copy via email for your records shortly.

If you have already ordered the replacement part from the supplier you have done so of your own volition since my original request was rejected, and any attempt to deliver it to me will be refused. The bed has not been assembled in any way, only the damaged part was taken out of it's box to provide photographic evidence of said damage.

As I stated in my previous email, I am willing to take any steps necessary to protect my rights in this matter.

Regards,

-Kevin

What do you think? It's not too aggressive in tone, is it?

ThumbRemote

Kevin_M wrote: »

Well, here's my reply (I haven't sent it yet):

What do you think? It's not too aggressive in tone, is it?

The letter is fine, but I can't help thinking you're cutting your nose off to spite your face. Just because you can reject it doesn't mean you should - presumably you wanted the bed originally, and this seems an acceptable solution.

USM

Yes it's too aggressive. They objected, you argued your point, you won and now you will have a fully working bed.

Absolutely no point in rejecting the bed.

Money-Saving-King

But now they're offering a remedy under the Sale of Goods Act you'll have to reject it under the Distant Selling Act surely?

I do agree with the above, accept their offer or your just causing yourself hassle.

Noctu

I would reject it - if something goes wrong with it in the near future, you don't want to be dealing with these cowboys again to try and get it resolved!

I'd tone the last letter down slightly and if they again refuse then I'd send them a Letter Before Action...

unholyangel

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

But now they're offering a remedy under the Sale of Goods Act you'll have to reject it under the Distant Selling Act surely?

I do agree with the above, accept their offer or your just causing yourself hassle.

No. Sale of Goods Act gives you a reasonable time to inspect the product and reject it outright if it does not conform to contract. This is why if you buy something and take it back within a reasonable time, you can insist on a refund as opposed to a repair or replacement.

Once a reasonable time has passed, you can request one remedy over another but the retailer can refuse if disproportionately costly in comparison to other remedies.

artbaron

Kevin_M wrote: »

Well, here's my reply (I haven't sent it yet):

What do you think? It's not too aggressive in tone, is it?

Take out the part about being "very sorry". Why would you be sorry for having to spend hours of your time dealing with idiots like the seller who make out they're doing you a favour whilst still falling short of what is required by law? I'd reject the bed on principle.

Kevin_M_2

Wow, reading all this legalese made me so tired I fell asleep for a couple of hours. I still haven't sent the email, BTW ...

I know some of you think I should just accept their offer, and while I agree that it would be less hassle, why should I accept it? These people felt no remorse in trying to squeeze more money out of me, and now they're trying to make it seem like they're doing me a favour when in fact they're just doing what they are legally obliged to.

Maybe what I could do is rewrite the email and offer to cancel the contract under DSR instead of SoGA. I know that would mean I have to pay for return costs, but in reality I might not have to. I work for a company which sends goods around the country via courier every day, and my boss often lets me send parcels for free. I could then make out to the bed company that I'm willing to take a financial hit to send the goods back at my own cost, even though I'm not.

Or do you think that would that weaken my position?