Paul Simon-Faulty basement

smiles345

halibut2209- thanks for your opinion.but i have to say that i'm not 2 year old. so as a consumer , i dont have any rights to claim any losess for the faulty goods which delivered second time? that means , the company can deliver any number time faulty goods provided there is somebody to receive it

halibut2209- what would you do if you were in this situation?

halibut2209

You DO have the right to claim losses, BUT you also have the duty to minimalise those losses. I'm simply telling you that should this ever get to a court stage, you would not get what you are demanding. Before you go into battle, know where you stand. Trust me, they know the legal position more than you do, so have a more realistic result in mind.

What would I do? Not sure why that would help as we are very different people, and I can only go on what you have presented here. But I have had faulty goods delivered, and on occasion the replacement has been faulty. I like to take a step back, look on the situation as an outsider, and if I feel aggrieved I may ask for some compensation as a gesture of goodwill so that the company might retain a customer. Or I might simply reject the goods and buy elsewhere.

hollydays

They may have in mind , something like a £30 voucher off your next purchase, as compensation, probably not £300.

smiles345

Thanks halibut2209 for your valuable opinion. i'm very disappointed with paul simon as well as stressed. i know that if this court ,it can be very difficult for me to deal with all and the time too.

bris

You need to actually prove your losses, being self employed it's a lot harder to do this. You need some form of proof, you can't just go in and say I didn't make £200 that day because I wasn't in the office.

You could easily make up the time by going to work after the delivery, you had that option as opposed to someone who works set hours in employment.

A lot of things can trip you up and if the judge decided you were at it you wouldn't get costs back for the claim as he would see it as frivolous.

frugal_mike

Just in case you are not aware, you do not have to keep accepting replacements when they deliver faulty items. If the items don't conform to contract before 'acceptance' (and you have a reasonable time to inspect the goods before acceptance) then you can reject them and terminate the contract.

ThumbRemote

halibut2209 wrote: »

That is perfectly valuable. As has been said, you have to mitigate your losses. If there is someone in the house who earns less, then they should/could be the one to take a delivery.

I don't think this is necessarily the case.

Mitigating your losses does not mean doing everything in your power to reduce the other parties costs. It simply means making reasonable steps to keep the losses to a minimum.

If OP has ordered something, and they are the one handling the sale, it is entirely reasonable that they be the one to receive delivery - even more so if they received the initial delivery. Otherwise you could take it to extremes and argue they should employ a 16-year-old to sit in the house for minimum wage to reduce costs further. It doesn't mean it's reasonable to do so.

italiastar

What's a "bed basement"