Tricky Return

Valli

shak2 wrote: »

Wait I've just realised something...you guys might be right in practice, but the law is worded wrong...

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

No, the law is worded so as not to be ambiguous. You however, have already shown that you can read things into posts that are not in them.

Smithers37

Someone please explain why the SOGA doesn't entitle the OP to a replacement?



(I'm just kidding of course)

matttye

Smithers37 wrote: »

Someone please explain why the SOGA doesn't entitle the OP to a replacement?



(I'm just kidding of course)

My head was about to explode until I saw the extra text in the quote :rotfl:

bod1467

Valli wrote: »

You however, have already shown that you can read things into posts that are not in them.

Sounds like someone else we know.

shak2

BTW we were all wrong:

(i) LOSS OF BARGAIN

Damages for loss of bargain are assessable to put the plaintiff, so far as money can do it, in the same situation as if the contract had been performed. For example, in a contract for the sale of goods which are defective, the plaintiff will (under this head) be entitled to damages reflecting the differences between the price paid under the contract and the actual value of the defective goods.

powerful_Rogue

and it continues........

If you want to try and claim "Loss of a bargain" you will need to file a claim with the small claims court. Not much else can really be said on the matter.

mije1983

shak2 wrote: »

BTW we were all wrong:

And here we go back to page 1 again............

:wall:

halibut2209

And we are now firmly into troll territory. Well played OP. You did a lot better than others of your ilk.

gik

What was the item?

matttye

shak2 wrote: »

BTW we were all wrong:

Yeah but you returned the item and got a full refund. You're therefore not entitled to any damages.