Bespoke greenhouse, incorrect size - what are our rights?

photome

would be good to know if the OP has had a resolution, considering they have continued to post on the forum but havent updated this thread

photome

Supersonos wrote: »

I have a similar problem at the moment with a garage door. It's a slightly different design to the photo and the website is saying we have to return them before we get a refund they've said they agree its different. I think they need to collect it?
What happened with the greenhouse deaston?

Probably best to start your own thread with more detail

deaston

photome wrote: »

would be good to know if the OP has had a resolution, considering they have continued to post on the forum but havent updated this thread

Apologies. I stopped because the trader threatened to sue us for slander (libel, one assumes) as a result of this thread.

The trader has agreed the greenhouse is not as described and agreed a full refund, but only once we return the greenhouse to them. They've told us they won't collect it, won't reimburse our costs of returning it and have offered no instructions on how to dismantle it.

We're currently going through the small claims track to get a resolution. They've instructed a solicitor who doesn't seem to understand the basics of consumer law (they've been quoting sections of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 which they seem to think overrules the Consumer Rights Act). They've also said we'll be paying their legal costs when we lose, something you can't claim in the small claims track.

They've said they are in no doubt they'll win and have offered us £1,000 to drop the case. Not so confident after all then...

We've quoted the Consumer Rights Act numerous times and even a paragraph from Which.co.uk, but they still refuse to collect the greenhouse.

Four months or so since it was delivered and now the roof is beginning to sag and come away from the walls, so we definitely made the right decision in attempting to reject it - it's very poorly made.

The fees are mounting up and they're not settling. A £4,000 refund has now become a £5,800 claim. Court date is January.

It's sad that we have had to go to all this effort and expense just to enforce our statutory rights.

photome

Good luck

deaston

photome wrote: »

Good luck

Thanks, although we don't need it. There's no chance we won't win. Trading Standards have even taken a keen interest and want us to keep them updated to help with their investigation into the company.

lincroft1710

deaston wrote: »

There's no chance we won't win.

Never prejudge the outcome of a tribunal or court case. There are plenty of instances of either perverse or unexpected decisions.

deaston

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Never prejudge the outcome of a tribunal or court case. There are plenty of instances of either perverse or unexpected decisions.

I don't see how we can't prejudge this one. They're in breach of contract in several ways, have threatened us with libel just for attempting to get advice, have lied to us about the reasons the greenhouse is too big etc. All we're doing is trying to exercise our short-term right to reject.

I'd genuinely be interested for you to offer some ideas on how this case could be ruled in the trader's favour. It'd be good to know as we can't see how.

lincroft1710

deaston wrote: »

I'd genuinely be interested for you to offer some ideas on how this case could be ruled in the trader's favour. It'd be good to know as we can't see how.

Look up the definition of "perverse decision".

I have personally known a few perverse decisions following tribunal hearings. Somewhere on these boards there is at least one (may be more, can't remember) perverse decision following a small claims court hearing.

deaston

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Look up the definition of "perverse decision".

I have personally known a few perverse decisions following tribunal hearings. Somewhere on these boards there is at least one (may be more, can't remember) perverse decision following a small claims court hearing.

As you haven't been able to actually point to a specific reason, I think you agree that there's no way we can't win.

lincroft1710

deaston wrote: »

As you haven't been able to actually point to a specific reason, I think you agree that there's no way we can't win.

No I don't agree. You clearly do not understand "perverse decision".

You appear to have a very solid case, but in the cases I have mentioned, the court or tribunal made a decision which was contrary to the very compelling evidence presented. These were "perverse decisions", decisions which go against the evidence presented.