Company trying to charge for faulty item return

50Twuncle

My employer (a school) purchased a MINI PC online - the device has turned out to be faulty - the company has admitted that this is the case and has requested that it is returned..
They use a 3rd party company for returns/replacements - who (eventually) gave me a RMA number and requested that we return it via them for a fix
They have not given me a FREEPOST address - so, presumably are expecting us to pay return postage
We purchased the device, less than 2 weeks ago - so can we not use SOGA 2015 to obtain free P&P to return the item ?
I had always assumed that an RMA number gave freepost - but apparently not..

neilmcl

This is a B2B contract so not a consumer issue. I don't think you have any choice at this stage but to pay for it to be returned.

steampowered

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 still applies to B2B contracts, which includes a term that the goods must be satisfactory quality and fit for purpose.

If they aren't, the seller should be reimbursing postage.

50Twuncle

steampowered wrote: »

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 still applies to B2B contracts, which includes a term that the goods must be satisfactory quality and fit for purpose.

If they aren't, the seller should be reimbursing postage.

Thanks - that is what I thought

Fosterdog

Although the SoGA does cover B2B, contracts override it so it will depend on what contract you have in place as even SoGA allows for rights to be written out of the contract. You can only rely on SoGA completely if there is no other contract in place and it would then automatically cover for certain things.

steampowered

Fosterdog wrote: »

Although the SoGA does cover B2B, contracts override it so it will depend on what contract you have in place as even SoGA allows for rights to be written out of the contract. You can only rely on SoGA completely if there is no other contract in place and it would then automatically cover for certain things.

That it is all true but it is subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which (unlike the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999) applies to B2B contracts and provides as follows:

section 3 - Liability arising in contract.

(1)This section applies as between contracting parties where one of them deals on the other’s written standard terms of business.
(2)As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any contract term—
(a)when himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any liability of his in respect of the breach; or
(b)claim to be entitled—
(i)to render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him, or
(ii)in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation, to render no performance at all,
except in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above in this subsection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(3)This section does not apply to a term in a consumer contract (but see the provision made about such contracts in section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015).

50Twuncle

steampowered wrote: »

That it is all true but it is subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which (unlike the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999) applies to B2B contracts and provides as follows:

section 3 - Liability arising in contract.

(1)This section applies as between contracting parties where one of them deals on the other’s written standard terms of business.
(2)As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any contract term—
(a)when himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any liability of his in respect of the breach; or
(b)claim to be entitled—
(i)to render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him, or
(ii)in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation, to render no performance at all,
except in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above in this subsection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(3)This section does not apply to a term in a consumer contract (but see the provision made about such contracts in section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015).

I am now confused - do we have a right to free return P&P or not ?

RoonilWazlib_2

Is there anything in your original contract that restricts any part of your rights. If not, then SoGA applies - SoGA 1979 though rather than 2015 that you indicated in OP.


Just ensure you code in correctly in correspondence - some traders will be petty enough to say you have no rights under SoGA2015 - which is technically true because it doesn't exist.


Consumer rights Act 2015 replaced SOGA but in your case SoGA still applies because its B2B (and CRA as the name suggests is for consumer contracts)




edit: I appreciate was probably just a typo but just making sure

50Twuncle

RoonilWazlib wrote: »

Is there anything in your original contract that restricts any part of your rights. If not, then SoGA applies - SoGA 1979 though rather than 2015 that you indicated in OP.


Just ensure you code in correctly in correspondence - some traders will be petty enough to say you have no rights under SoGA2015 - which is technically true because it doesn't exist.


Consumer rights Act 2015 replaced SOGA but in your case SoGA still applies because its B2B (and CRA as the name suggests is for consumer contracts)

To be honest - I don't believe that we had a contract - we just paid for the device using the school credit card and it was sent to us !!

Fosterdog

steampowered wrote: »

That it is all true but it is subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which (unlike the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999) applies to B2B contracts and provides as follows:

section 3 - Liability arising in contract.

(1)This section applies as between contracting parties where one of them deals on the other’s written standard terms of business.
(2)As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any contract term—
(a)when himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any liability of his in respect of the breach; or
(b)claim to be entitled—
(i)to render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him, or
(ii)in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation, to render no performance at all,
except in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above in this subsection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(3)This section does not apply to a term in a consumer contract (but see the provision made about such contracts in section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015).

All that boils down to is that it has to be reasonable. It's really not saying what you seem to think it says. In business contracts it is very common for the buyer even in the case of faulty goods to have to pay for return costs, that would be completely unreasonable in consumer contracts but it's not in business.

OP where was it bought from? A specific B2B supplier? A UK supplier?

50Twuncle

Fosterdog wrote: »

All that boils down to is that it has to be reasonable. It's really not saying what you seem to think it says. In business contracts it is very common for the buyer even in the case of faulty goods to have to pay for return costs, that would be completely unreasonable in consumer contracts but it's not in business.

OP where was it bought from? A specific B2B supplier? A UK supplier?

Ebuyer - but the device (a Hannspree mini PC) is being replaced by Repairtech for Hannspree !!