order sofa from scs new years day

tomtontom

craigyjr wrote: »

i did not go back in to see how much it cost i looked at the peice of paper i had giving the sales rep my price range and thought she had followed it so i did not ask or look at prices

craigyjr wrote: »

if i said i had £50 to spend would you take me too a £100 pair of jeans?

A sales person should give you a range of options, which may include some below and some above your budget. You then make an informed decision, by looking at the prices and deciding whether they are acceptable to you. Was there not a price list at the sofa display, as well as on the document you signed?

mije1983

craigyjr wrote: »

if i said i had £50 to spend would you take me too a £100 pair of jeans?

Yes, I probably would. Because my job would be to sell things to you.

On the other hand if I was that customer, I would then point out that unless there was a deal to be had on said jeans, that they were out of my price range.

craigyjr wrote: »

so after 30 minutes we see a couch we really like we design the couch too how we would like it.

When you say this, do you mean you have added extras to it? Is this what made it more expensive?

Out of interest, do you have a link to the one you bought?

Poppie68

craigyjr wrote: »

if i said i had £50 to spend would you take me too a £100 pair of jeans?

It's entirely your fault for not checking, they are there to sell and they won't always go for the cheapest option even if asked....If a limit was so important then 'how much' should of been the first thing out of your mouth..

Before you make any other hasty decisions have a look around, because of the transfer issue you may struggle to find anything else in your price range and this sofa may turn out to be the most affordable.

unholyangel

Poppie68 wrote: »

It's entirely your fault for not checking, they are there to sell and they won't always go for the cheapest option even if asked....If a limit was so important then 'how much' should of been the first thing out of your mouth..

Before you make any other hasty decisions have a look around, because of the transfer issue you may struggle to find anything else in your price range and this sofa may turn out to be the most affordable.

Sorry but I don't agree. If you tell a salesperson you want a specific colour, material, feature or have a price limit, it should not be up to the consumer to then make sure that the sales person has adhered to that. It is for the sales person to highlight that it doesn't match your requirements but oh look how fantastic it is for just £x more than the other one I showed you.

Different if the OP had made no mention of their budget to the sales person, but OP says they told them what their maximum spend was.

Them wanting to make more profit while completely disregarding the consumers needs/wants is exactly why we have consumer protection.

Poppie68

unholyangel wrote: »

Sorry but I don't agree. If you tell a salesperson you want a specific colour, material, feature or have a price limit, it should not be up to the consumer to then make sure that the sales person has adhered to that. It is for the sales person to highlight that it doesn't match your requirements but oh look how fantastic it is for just £x more than the other one I showed you.

Different if the OP had made no mention of their budget to the sales person, but OP says they told them what their maximum spend was.

Them wanting to make more profit while completely disregarding the consumers needs/wants is exactly why we have consumer protection.

Of course it's up to the customer to make sure their requirements have been adhered to before signing on the dotted line.... after all it's their money and their job to safeguard it.
Or is this now just another example of the British public shirking their responsibilities and allowing them to have a moan...No wonder we have become a nation of compensation hungry people.

unholyangel

Poppie68 wrote: »

Of course it's up to the customer to make sure their requirements have been adhered to before signing on the dotted line.... after all it's their money and their job to safeguard it.
Or is this now just another example of the British public shirking their responsibilities and allowing them to have a moan...No wonder we have become a nation of compensation hungry people.

Not shirking anything - as I said, different story had the OP not mentioned their max spend.

You should not have to continually check at every turn that the retailer is doing what you asked them. They should be carrying out their duties with reasonable care and skill.

If retailers were able to disregard things like this all because they're selling/trying to make a profit, there would be no consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, unfair contract terms act, unfair terms in consumer contract regulations etc.

The reason all of the above exist is because of retailers abusing their position in complete unfairness to the consumer. Contracts need to be balanced and protect the interests and obligations of both parties - not just one.

Poppie68

unholyangel wrote: »

Not shirking anything - as I said, different story had the OP not mentioned their max spend.

You should not have to continually check at every turn that the retailer is doing what you asked them. They should be carrying out their duties with reasonable care and skill.

If retailers were able to disregard things like this all because they're selling/trying to make a profit, there would be no consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, unfair contract terms act, unfair terms in consumer contract regulations etc.

The reason all of the above exist is because of retailers abusing their position in complete unfairness to the consumer. Contracts need to be balanced and protect the interests and obligations of both parties - not just one.

u




Surely as a consumer you should check what your buying before agreeing to it?
As shown in this situation if you don't take responsibility you get stung.

meer53

unholyangel wrote: »

Not shirking anything - as I said, different story had the OP not mentioned their max spend.

You should not have to continually check at every turn that the retailer is doing what you asked them. They should be carrying out their duties with reasonable care and skill.

If retailers were able to disregard things like this all because they're selling/trying to make a profit, there would be no consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, unfair contract terms act, unfair terms in consumer contract regulations etc.

The reason all of the above exist is because of retailers abusing their position in complete unfairness to the consumer. Contracts need to be balanced and protect the interests and obligations of both parties - not just one.

What sane person would sign a finance agreement without checking how much the item is ? This is not some complicated multi level finance agreement, it's a sofa. The bottom line figures are what the OP should have looked at, they didn't, can't see how that is the fault of SCS ?

unholyangel

meer53 wrote: »

What sane person would sign a finance agreement without checking how much the item is ? This is not some complicated multi level finance agreement, it's a sofa. The bottom line figures are what the OP should have looked at, they didn't, can't see how that is the fault of SCS ?

Sorry, didn't realise you had been present for the purchase and knew what OP had seen and/or signed.

tomtontom

unholyangel wrote: »

Sorry, didn't realise you had been present for the purchase and knew what OP had seen and/or signed.

The OP has acknowledged that the relevant information was on the paperwork signed, and has twice acknowledged that he is the one at fault here. So unless you were there, it seems fair to go with what the OP has told us?