Everyone Lost In The Ether

bubbs

MKS wrote: »

Thanks. Have physio at 3 which means neck, back and hand will be giving me gip tonight.:(

:(:( you need to rest then x

altojack

bubbs wrote: »

He was busy snoring:rotfl::rotfl: thanks i am sure i will, hope you are feeling better?
AJ is your cough better? orry you are in pain too:(
Perky hope you soon feel better:)
Ls how you feeling?

What a bunch we are:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Still got a productive cough, debating whether to ring for appointment to see doc in the morning.
Arthritis playing up in my back with the cold damp weather grrr. It happens every year so I get to expect it now.

Seems like it's been weeks that a lot of us have been sickies

Off to check my Freepostcodelottery . I live in hope of even a little win.

See you later folks x

Anon

Munqui wrote: »

Is home delivery not an option?
...Actually, you can't do same day HD can you

:think: I have no evouchers at all
...My store has no JF oil, so I might just order 2 on a CC :money:

Actually, I need to check if they have any plug in things too, are they still comparing £4 to £1 does anyone know ?

edit: can someone check my store for me, I'm really really busy.. tia

You can order the JF oils but unfortunately wouldn't be able to order the trigger?

Anon

mhoc

emerald21 wrote: »

Hehe I'm not bothered either way as its not a shop I frequent much unless I'm walking back to the car parked in Tesco as its warmer to go that way when I'm in Eagles Meadow usually to get my 02 £1 dinners in a Monday

I think Debenhams is a financial indicator of how well an area is doing - with the Bradford shopping centre they were the first to put their names down 5 years ago so they had confidence that it had a rising economy whereas it had doubts about my home town (quite rightly, even the Co op department store pulled out a few years ago) and my nearest town - well it would just be financial suicide for them to even contemplate

bcw123

Afternoon all Off to A' s in a hour Has any one any idea whether the hand washes are still working if so what is the trigger thanks

Munqui

Anon wrote: »

You can order the JF oils but unfortunately wouldn't be able to order the trigger?

Anon

Yeah, no CC trigger that I know of, just incomplete multi giving about £11 apg from £20ish order.

Maybe the plug-ins are a better idea :rotfl:

...I probably won't end up getting an order in before the jf offer ends in sains anyway

ledlights

Tesco Nintendo 2 ds order was due 2 days ago been on the phone and there now saying they took the order and theres no more stock so offering a refund of cash for order price when I payed with points really not happy as theres no way you can buy the 2ds with Mario kart 7 for £49

Picasso7

Has anyone any experience of Delivery Deals please? I've just bought some cards from Funky Pigeon (code on the codes board) and it promised me £10 cashback if I joined. When I looked at their website, there is a ten day trial offered but it does say you get 10% cashback and Tesco is one of the retailers -- I can't find a list of the rest. It also says that it costs £14.97 a month :eek: after the ten day trial. I'm unclear if the £10 cashback is compatible with the ten day trial. This looks extremely risky to me but does anyone know anything about it please?

Edit. Forgive me. It does say: Get £10 Cashback on your qualifying order!* As an introductory offer for joining DeliveryDeals, you’ll get £10 cashback! Sign up today for a 10-Day no cost review and redeem your introductory offer. To redeem, simply complete the online form (we'll send you the link in a welcome email after you join) and follow the instructions provided. DeliveryDeals members get 10% Cashback, Delivery Rebates, and more at top web retailers! Once you’re a member, choose from hundreds of retailers to shop with via the DeliveryDeals website and save every time you shop! Members can save up to £2,000 per year with cashback, delivery rebates, and exclusive vouchers! Come see why smart shoppers make DeliveryDeals their first stop when they shop!

hornetgirl

T have refunded me £10 for the dodgy bottle I had in my mystery fizz box last week, so 5 bottles for £30 in the end

Savvybuyer

henrik777 wrote: »

The trouble is that a motorist accepts the contract by conduct (the act of parking) whereas with cameras there is no conduct that would be capable of acceptance.

Quite how 6 of their lordships can accept that the average consumer is happy to agree to pay £85 is mind boggling. I can only assume the supreme court herbal tea supplies are rather strong and the 1 judge who saw sense doesn't drink it !

I'd argue that acceptance by conduct is implied though (actually I don't think this bit is an argument - I think it's a matter of settled law) - and I'd add to this - that, IMO, there is nothing to prevent me expressly, by words, excluding anything that that my conduct, otherwise, might imply.

In order to prevent misunderstanding it could be argued. For example, if you are in a supermarket and go up to a till and hand an SA an item, without you saying anything, they might reasonably assume that you wanted to buy that item. However, if, when handing the item to them, you say "Please can you just check the price of this" then they know what you mean and won't be thinking you intend to buy the goods and form a contract. It's slightly different in that situation, but that's the analogy. The closer situation is this (I'd argue): normally if you put goods on the conveyor and they scan them, then a binding contract is formed at the moment at which they scan the item - your putting the goods on the belt made an offer, by you, to purchase them (implied by conduct, you did not say anything in words to the SA) and their scanning is the acceptance of your offer (this is notwithstanding that some stores will allow you to cancel and not purchase items even after they have scanned them - technically, in law though, I believe, there is a binding contract). If however you put the goods down on the belt and at the same time say "Can you just check the price?" then clearly a scanning in response to that is not the formation of a binding contract.

Similarly (I'd argue again as my view has not been proven to be correct in law - as far as I know no court has ever considered the issue), if I park my car on such a car park, then my conduct may indicate acceptance of a contract. If however, if I park my car on the car park, and the same time, expressly say "My conduct is not to be taken to amount to forming any contract and I expressly hereby disclaim any doing so and I completely disagree with any offer that you make and my mind does not meet with that in any way whatsoever", then the situation I'd argue is totally different. There is, I'd argue, no contract. If someone says "sit down on a chair that I'm providing you and you agree to pay me £500", if I sit down, I agree to pay. If however, I sit down and whilst doing so, I say "I do not agree to pay you anything", then I've expressly excluded what my conduct, had I not said that, might otherwise have implied and thus no meeting of minds, I'd argue, and (again I'd argue) there is no contract.

The point is that a contract is an agreement voluntarily entered into by the parties. I do not voluntarily agree to enter into anything. I do not have to. I can say, out loud, via the putting up of a notice by myself in my car windscreen, I'm not agreeing, despite what your notice says - and moreover purport to exclude everything it says in its entirety and propose my own terms instead. Under which I charge you for touching my car in any way. Then we have a 'battle of the forms' situation. Of course my charges are extremely high indeed, and you can voluntarily agree to them by touching my car!

It's not that people are "happy" to pay £85 - clearly the person who brought the case wasn't happy! - but suppliers can set whatever prices they want for goods or 'services' or facilities (such as parking services or facilities - not sure if this would technically legally be a service or a facility:o:o) - it's just like Mr M can have whatever prices they want - and if we want or don't want to pay them, we can take them or leave them. (Sometimes people buy things at high cost because they believe there isn't any real alternative.) Without knowing about the parking case in detail, I reckon it was this 'reasonableness' thing - the issue raised of whether or not the price was reasonable (by reference to the going market rate). There's limited scope to challenge things, sometimes, on the basis of allegedly unfair terms. Usually when no price is agreed at the outset. (I'd argue my approach is completely consistent with what the Supreme Court ruling - I have not read it - appears to be saying. Here, it seems a price was agreed as surely it's stated on their notice at the outset? Whether or not that price is then 'reasonable' is irrelevant - the consumer agreed by their conduct to pay it. Their conduct was merely parking there - they didn't raise any issue or say that their conduct would not amount to a contract at that stage at all.)

Fact is someone can say the charge is £x (really high) and, if you then park there, without further ado and without making clear that that conduct is not to be taken as amounting to acceptance of a contract, then you agree to pay the stated price. Just like taking a fully priced item from the supermarket shelf and putting it on the conveyor and then buying it, at that high price. Far better in my view to purport to prevent and then deny the existence of any contract in the first place. Then they've no right to charge - I did not agree to anything and I expressly said so. Pity the poor average consumer that just parks in the car park and never considers these sorts of legal manoeuvres by themselves.