parcel force clearance fee

d123

tremault wrote: »

It's applicable.

United States law and legal definitions are applicable to the United Kingdom???

When did that happen?

System

You find a different definition that challenges it then. Not that it changes anything. You're just cherry picking.

d123

tremault wrote: »

You find a different definition that challenges it then. Not that it changes anything. You're just cherry picking.

Why don’t you use a UK definition? Is it because it doesn’t suit your crazy and twisted interpretations?

Would you like me to educate you on the legal definition from UK law?

System

If you had a legal definition you would have provided it already. You don't 'educate me'.

System

I already found a UK definition. Chattels. And as I already said, it doesnt change anything.
The package wasn't my property until I accepted it.

The vat was due before delivery could be made therefore the vat was due before it became my property. After it became my property, no vat was due.

d123

tremault wrote: »

If you had a legal definition you would have provided it already. You don't 'educate me'.

I do educate you, I was just waiting for you to ask.

Here you go.

(8)“Goods” means any tangible moveable items, but that includes water, gas and electricity if and only if they are put up for supply in a limited volume or set quantity.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/2


And to be nice, here’s even the explanatory notes

38.Subsection (8) sets out another key definition: the meaning of “goods”. This derives from Article 2(3) of the CRD.

Essentially “goods” means anything physical which you can move (“any tangible moveable item”). Therefore, Chapter 2 of Part 1 of the Act (the goods Chapter) does not apply to purchases of immovable property such as land or a house.

However, this subsection makes clear the meaning of goods can include certain utilities (water, gas and electricity) where they are put up for sale in a limited volume or set quantity.

Examples of these are a gas cylinder, a bottle of water or a battery. Section 3 contains further provision on the scope of the contracts for goods covered by the Act.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/notes

d123

tremault wrote: »

I already found a UK definition. Chattels. And as I already said, it doesnt change anything.
The package wasn't my property until I accepted it.

The vat was due before delivery could be made therefore the vat was due before it became my property. After it became my property, no vat was due.

Nope, that was the common law definition, superseded by Statute, as shown above. The definition of goods was taken from a judgement of the European Court and applies across the European Union (Commision v Belgium).

goods for the purposes of the Treaty must be taken to include any movable physical object to which property rights or obligations attach (and which can therefore be valued in monetary terms, whether positive or negative)”

Judgment in Commission v Belgium, EU:C:1992:310

Consider yourself educated.

d123

tremault wrote: »

Oh dear too late. No you don't educate me, misogynist.

How can education ever be too late?

And how would education be misogynistic?

I suspect you’re just feeling embarrassed that you were wrong on that point, (well on almost every point in the entire thread), aren’t you?

d123

tremault wrote: »

misogynist.

By the way, personal insults are against the rules (and that one is downright stupid in my opinion as you have assumed my gender, and nothing has been written relating to gender, good or bad).

I think maybe you need a break from the computer, maybe some fresh air or a nap?

System

Yes, chattels exactly what I said. Do I need to spell it out to you?



Also misogynist means against woman, seems I need to spell that out too. A woman can be a misogynist.

You speak just like a misogynist, or someone who does that 'mansplaining' thing or a chauvinist. It's not an insult, it's an observation of behaviour.