Return Shipping Costs

jjlandlord

Guys you can argue all you want. I quoted the definition in law.

Now if you want to argue that a non-existing request is a prior request you'll have to show case law.
Especially that, in the UK, the law also states that a cancelled distant contract should be treated as never have been made... If the contract was never made then there was never any request.

Either way it makes no difference whether the goods were 'unsolicited' or 'sent in error': in law it is for the sender to resolve at his cost.

Again, the only practical difficulty to enforce that here is that the seller is in Germany, and as such it may be more trouble and expense than to pay for the return (and never ever buy from them again).

halibut2209

"If the contract was never made there was never any request."


LOL

timbstoke

jjlandlord wrote: »

Guys you can argue all you want. I quoted the definition in law.

You quoted something. It certainly wasn't the law.

jjlandlord

timbstoke wrote: »

You quoted something. It certainly wasn't the law.

I quoted the reference. Is it too difficult for you to look it up?

s.6 Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971:

“unsolicited” means, in relation to goods sent to any person, that they are sent without any prior request made by him or on his behalf.

Astonishingly, that's also pretty much the definition of unsolicited.


s.10 The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000:

(2) Except as otherwise provided by these Regulations, the effect of a notice of cancellation is that the contract shall be treated as if it had not been made.

How does that change the fact that it is for the sender to resolve at his cost, anyway?

Jeez, school holidays and everyone's at home and bored or something...

unholyangel

jjlandlord wrote: »

Guys you can argue all you want. I quoted the definition in law.

Now if you want to argue that a non-existing request is a prior request you'll have to show case law.
Especially that, in the UK, the law also states that a cancelled distant contract should be treated as never have been made... If the contract was never made then there was never any request.

Either way it makes no difference whether the goods were 'unsolicited' or 'sent in error': in law it is for the sender to resolve at his cost.

Again, the only practical difficulty to enforce that here is that the seller is in Germany, and as such it may be more trouble and expense than to pay for the return (and never ever buy from them again).

Well if you want to take that viewpoint.....lets apply the same logic to your posts. Please quote case law to back up your viewpoint. But think about it for a second. If what you're saying was correct......cancelling after the goods had been dispatched but before they arrived would then entitle everyone to free goods.

What makes the request non-existent? When an order is cancelled under the CCRs, it only means that any obligation to perform the contract is at an end.

Effect of withdrawal or cancellation

33.—(1) If a contract is cancelled under regulation 29(1)—

(a)the cancellation ends the obligations of the parties to perform the contract, and
(b)regulations 34 to 38 apply.

A request and a contract are two different things. Its so simple it really shouldnt need any explaining.

But its all rather moot given we're discussing UK law when the contract of sale is likely governed by german law.

jjlandlord

unholyangel wrote: »

cancelling after the goods had been dispatched but before they arrived would then entitle everyone to free goods.

I hope you realise that this is non-sensical.

Why are you even arguing, guys?

unholyangel

jjlandlord wrote: »

I hope you realise that this is non-sensical.

Why are you even arguing, guys?

You're right, it is nonsensical (i would have went with inane myself but apples n oranges).....but thats exactly what you're saying. That cancelling the contract cancels the request.

As for why we're even debating it.... again you're right. Much better to let people give out inaccurate advice unchallenged so that the OP and any future readers can be potentially misled.

The whole point of this forum is not just to help people with their consumer rights issues but to educate them on their rights also. If more people were aware of their rights then retailers who breach those rights would have a harder time getting away with it.

bod1467

jjlandlord wrote: »

Why are you even arguing, guys?

Because you're wrong, Rab.

timbstoke

jjlandlord wrote: »

s.6 Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971:

You are aware that the law comprises the entire statute, not just the parts of it that make your point, right? A definition is only that. It's how the law makes use of that definition that counts, and there is nothing in the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act which entitles you to keep the goods, or prevents the sender from recovering them. UGS relates only to their right to demand payment for the goods, and only then if it's sent for use in the course of a business.

s2: A person who, not having reasonable cause to believe there is a right to payment, in the course of any trade or business makes a demand for payment, or asserts a present or prospective right to payment, for what he knows are unsolicited goods sent (after the commencement of this Act) to another person with a view to his acquiring them for the purposes of his trade or business, shall be guilty of an offence and on summary conviction shall be liable to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

Fraser74

Thanks for all the responses. Things have moved on and rather than hold them to their £25 for pick up and return I'm going to do it all myself.

Tried the link provided by zaax and it was £100+ but a parcel comparison site has quoted me £18 with one of the majors. All I have to do is drop it off at one of their collect points, which happens to be on the way to work.

I do think if this had been a UK based company I would have argued the email offer of £25 not realising I could do it cheaper myself for very little hassle.

Thanks again.