Order not as described

squigglebit

Hello,

I hope you can offer some advice of where I stand.
I ordered some bespoke products from a company, they supplied us with mockups and we placed the order.
The finished items do not work in the way the mockup did or the way their website describes.
I have contacted the company and explained the issues, provided them with videos of our items not working in the way described and discussed my complaint with them.
They are flat out denying that the goods are "not as described" and are refusing to do anything.
Thus purchase was made through my business. Where do I stand and what is the next step?

spadoosh

Youd need to sue them for breach of contract. Although probably worth getting legal advice surrounding the contract that was agreed and the legal position on your disagreement of 'not as described'.

If you have legal protection insurance as part of your business speak to them first. If not, potentially worth speaking with your business insurer if it offers anything in terms of legal protection.

squigglebit

I've just had a look through the contract and the whole contract refers to the sale of goods act 1979 which obviously no longer exists. Would this mean the contract is not enforceable?

bris

The Sale of Goods act does still exist but the consumer rights part of it has now been stripped out and replaced by the Consumer Contracts regulations.


This has no bearing on a B2B purchase. You can still sue for breach of contract, Contract Law is still binding on both parties so if you believe they have breached this contract then the ball is in your court.

shaun_from_Africa

squigglebit wrote: »

I've just had a look through the contract and the whole contract refers to the sale of goods act 1979 which obviously no longer exists. Would this mean the contract is not enforceable?

It is S13 of the Sale of goods act that should be the basis of any claim or legal action that you take.

13 Sale by description.
(1)Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied [F12term] that the goods will correspond with the description.
[F13(1A) As regards England and Wales and Northern Ireland, the term implied by subsection (1) above is a condition.]
(2)If the sale is by sample as well as by description it is not sufficient that the bulk of the goods corresponds with the sample if the goods do not also correspond with the description.

squigglebit

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

It is S13 of the Sale of goods act that should be the basis of any claim or legal action that you take.

Yes this is what I've looked at, but on further inspection of their contract they state "The terms implied by sections 13 to 15 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 are, to the fullest extent permitted by law, excluded from the contract"

I'm not sure where I stand with this.

shaun_from_Africa

squigglebit wrote: »

"The terms implied by sections 13 to 15 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 are, to the fullest extent permitted by law, excluded from the contract"

Basically what that term means is that they (the seller) are only liable for the minimum possible that the law requires of them.

As the SOGA specifically states that goods must be as described, they can't therefore use that statement to exclude their liability if the goods are not as described.

squigglebit

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Basically what that term means is that they (the seller) are only liable for the minimum possible that the law requires of them.

As the SOGA specifically states that goods must be as described, they can't therefore use that statement to exclude their liability if the goods are not as described.

Thanks appreciate the help

spadoosh

Youre not going to get the contract invalidated because it references out of date acts.

There is a contract in place. You placed an order, they accepted it. Thats the starting point. From that a basic requirement is that the goods meet the description. This is where your issue lies.

Theres no point chasing consumer law because youre not one. Youre a business. As such consumer law has no relevance.

If you believe the goods do not match the description you will need to sue them. Depending on the value of the goods and your desire to pursue this you should contemplate getting legal advice to see the potential of 'not as described' being successful.

Theres a slight chance the other business will relent and refund if you take the 'right' approach with them. What that approach is though no one could guess. Some would relent at a letter before action. Some would pay up with the threat of publishing reviews of your expeirence. Whilst others will not give up at all and potentially be willing to argue in courts.

shaun_from_Africa

spadoosh wrote: »

Youre not going to get the contract invalidated because it references out of date acts.

The Sale of goods act is not out of date.
It is current legislation which applies to business to business contracts of sale.
It's only the parts of it that used to cover business to consumer contracts that no longer apply.

DoaM

squigglebit wrote: »

"The terms implied by sections 13 to 15 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 are, to the fullest extent permitted by law, excluded from the contract".

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Basically what that term means is that they (the seller) are only liable for the minimum possible that the law requires of them.

In other words, they've contracted out those SoGA terms so you may find it difficult to rely on them.

PS - this is not a Consumer Rights issue therefore this is the wrong board. I'm not sure which would be the right board though.