Currys.co.uk not abiding by Distance Selling Regulations

mattyprice4004

Mulder00 wrote: »

Curry's are the masters of finding holes in laws, terms & conditions and generally just being the worst company when it comes to customer service and trying to make a quick buck. I've had so many arguments with them which I've lost, from their price match guarantee, to stock being incorrectly priced in-store. I always lose, they always win.

I now refuse to ever go in there ever again...

None of what you've said there is anything closed to 'finding holes in laws' - if something has the wrong price on they don't have to sell it to you, and they don't have to price-match either.

unholyangel

frugal_mike wrote: »

Obviously they meant 7 working days starting the day after delivery, not the day of delivery.

Also that text is ambiguous as to what the 7 working days refers to. If I didn't know better I might think they were saying the item has to be returned to them in 7 working days, but of course they just mean you have to notify them you are cancelling (by durable means) within 7 working days.

They are sending this information out because the Distance Selling Regulations requires them to send it by durable means. If they hadn't then the 7 working days would extend to up to 3 months and 7 working days.

I'm not sure that counts under section 8. Apparently the information in section 8 needs to be provided in a way that requires no action on the consumers part. PDF's usually require you to click on them to download/access them.

frugal_mike

unholyangel wrote: »

I'm not sure that counts under section 8. Apparently the information in section 8 needs to be provided in a way that requires no action on the consumers part. PDF's usually require you to click on them to download/access them.

I could understand that if the PDF had to be downloaded from the internet, but not if it was sent as an attachment to an email. After all I would have to take action to open the email too.

unholyangel

frugal_mike wrote: »

I could understand that if the PDF had to be downloaded from the internet, but not if it was sent as an attachment to an email. After all I would have to take action to open the email too.

But the email is received without any action on consumers part, the information in the pdf isn't :P

I cant remember who it was that made the distinction but I've quoted it a few times before so I'll go see if I can find it again. Found it. it was an ECJ ruling, regarding durable mediums and sending of links in emails. The ECJ said:

The ECJ said that because a consumer "must act in order to acquaint himself with the information" contained in a link, they could not be said to have received that information from a trader. The information, therefore, could not be said to have been given by a trader, it added.

It was considered not to be a durable means but they also didn't find it to be satisfying the requirement for the trader to send (and the consumer to receive) the information without requiring action on the consumers part.

wealdroam

unholyangel wrote: »

PDF's usually require you to click on them to download/access them.

As do emails.

frugal_mike

unholyangel wrote: »

But the email is received without any action on consumers part, the information in the pdf isn't :P

I cant remember who it was that made the distinction but I've quoted it a few times before so I'll go see if I can find it again.

But the content of the PDF is also received without any action on the part of the consumer. Some email clients may be configured to not automatically download attachments, but it's all part of the MIME content. If someone official has made the distinction then fair enough, but it strikes me they lacked technical knowledge

If you wanted to be really pedantic, the information in the email is not given to the consumer without them taking the action of reading it :P

Hintza

This thread is about one thing, "buyers remorse" and fortunately for the OP they might manage to wangle the DSR in their favour even after they have played with the item for a number of days and had the opportunity to test it in store.

Actions like this just drive up prices.

frugal_mike

Hintza wrote: »

This thread is about one thing, "buyers remorse" and fortunately for the OP they might manage to wangle the DSR in their favour even after they have played with the item for a number of days and had the opportunity to test it in store.

Actions like this just drive up prices.

With click and collect you do not have the opportunity to test the item in the store. The contract concluded before the OP walked through the door so had no option to test the item before the sale was binding.

shaun_from_Africa

Hintza wrote: »

This thread is about one thing, "buyers remorse" and fortunately for the OP they might manage to wangle the DSR in their favour.

And this board is about one thing, "consumer rights". and if the OP is legally entitled to a full refund then they are not "wangling" anything, simply making use of their statutory rights.

unholyangel

frugal_mike wrote: »

But the content of the PDF is also received without any action on the part of the consumer. Some email clients may be configured to not automatically download attachments, but it's all part of the MIME content. If someone official has made the distinction then fair enough, but it strikes me they lacked technical knowledge

If you wanted to be really pedantic, the information in the email is not given to the consumer without them taking the action of reading it :P

I edited my post above. Its an ECJ ruling - which I believe is binding on courts of all member states.