Is Argos acting legally?

daytona0

But I see you made a valid point...

So any curved line that assigns a value beyond 6 years is fundamentally unfair to the consumer, because they take the hit with bigger reductions in the early years, but then get no benefit to the item having a value beyond the 6 year mark.

Do they?

Let's model it really quickly. Watch this, yours vs mine

Cost = £100
Percentage reduced = 10%

Year 1 - £90 for both models
Year 2 - £80 for yours and £81 for mine
Year 3 - £70 vs £72.9
Year 4 - £60 vs £65.61
Year 5 - £50 vs £59.05
Year 6 - £40 vs £53.14

Your hypothetical year 11 - £0 vs £30 ish

Looks better for the consumer to me!! Though the percentage would ideally need to be more within the 12.5% to 15% range because 10% is too low for my method. Or is it? hmm

Anyway, all of this aside. I think your approach is lazy maths but it does the trick in fairness! So whatever!

ThumbRemote

Using 'my' figures you can say what the drop each year is based on the expected lifespan of the product (you've picked 10 years I see). The expected life is clearly an estimate, but is based on cost, quality, statue of limitations etc.

Using 'your' figures you've started with the 10% figure. What is this based on?

unholyangel

steampowered wrote: »

I gave you a link to the official table which lists the fees involved with starting a court claim. If you want to know what the fees are just click on the link.

The size of the fee depends on the size of the amount you are claiming. The maximum fee is £10,000 which apply when you are issuing a claim for £200,000 or more. I doubt the Op's mattress is worth £200,000.

I don't think there is any potential for misleading people. When you complete the form to issue a claim on the moneyclaimonline website, you are told what the fee is and you have to enter your credit card details to pay it.

I got the impression foxtrotoscar was perhaps referring to the other fee's involved rather than just the filing fee. Plus a company part of a group the size argos is will usually have solicitors on their their payroll so it might not cost them more than bus/train fare to defend.

Theres also a chance if a judge decides their offer was reasonable and OP was unreasonable that costs (even as limited as they are in small claims) are not awarded or awarded against OP. At present we have no idea what OP paid (or have I maybe missed it?) so can't even tell if OP has a reasonable claim yet, let alone whether its worth issuing a claim.

If OP paid £200, I'd say 67% is very generous. If it was a £1000 mattress, imo much less than it should be.

daytona0

ThumbRemote wrote: »

I said "if" it had a ten year life span. I also clarified with "if some other length of time then calculated accordingly"

Yes, but you used that "if" to map out a percentage. I did precisely the same thing as you (and prompted by you doing it), yet you criticised me for it!

Double standards

Anyway I'm not bothered like, I'm just making a point about why I don't really like that type of approach. All academic anyway!

daytona0

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Using 'my' figures you can say what the drop each year is based on the expected lifespan of the product (you've picked 10 years I see). The expected life is clearly an estimate, but is based on cost, quality, statue of limitations etc.

Using 'your' figures you've started with the 10% figure. What is this based on?

It was based on this post:

ThumbRemote wrote:

If that mattress should be expected to last 10 years, the deduction should be 20%, if some other length of time then calculated accordingly.

Mapping a SOGA refund value based on IF date ranges which exceed 6 years.

I've simply done the same as you (IF statements and extrapolation), so you can't criticise me.

unholyangel

As for value of the refund. Could it not be said - if you buy a £100 item and its worth £80 later - that you've had £20 use of the item?

However, I suspect the legislation doesn't set a specific method because whats suitable for one instance, might not be suitable for another. Its not strictly related to depreciation or value. Hence why something may still hold value on the second hand market but if a court deem it met satisfactory quality (which covers durabiity) taking into account the relevant information then you might not be awarded anything.

Obviously putting OP into the exact same position is quite literally impossible. So the function of damages are to compensate them (as far as money can do it) to put them in as close to a financial position as reasonably possible had the breach not occurred with no entitlement to betterment (as they consider that as penalising the party in breach rather than compensating the injured party for their loss). But where there is not a second hand market for goods of that type, "new for old" isn't betterment - them receiving the benefit can't be avoided basically. It is a incredibly complex area of the law with many careful considerations.


But perhaps OP could just try and reason with them. If you're still willing to buy from Argos, ask them if they'll offer more in store credit. Or perhaps if its a relatively small amount, point out they're offering (for example) £200 when you think £240 would be more reasonable and that the extra £40 ensures a happy customer & your repeat custom/perhaps buying a replacement from them. The worst they can do is say no, 67% is our final offer.

steampowered

unholyangel wrote: »

I got the impression foxtrotoscar was perhaps referring to the other fee's involved rather than just the filing fee.

If anyone wants to know what those fees are, they can find out by reading the court leaflet which lists all the fees. I posted a link to it.

Plus a company part of a group the size argos is will usually have solicitors on their their payroll so it might not cost them more than bus/train fare to defend.

Even if Argos does have solicitors on their payroll, there is still a cost to the business for the time involved in taking a trip down to defend a case like this. My experience has always been that large companies settle the vast majority of reasonable claims as soon as claim form hits their doormat.

Of course the Op should always try to negotiate first, the small claims option is always there as a back stop.