Bridemaid dress cancellation

pinkshoes

What was the original agreement for paying for the bridesmaid dresses? Is this different from what is now being demanded?

E.g. it was agreed that the bridesmaid dresses would be paid in 4 instalments of £300, and the shop are now demanding payment in full, or was the balance supposed to be paid now?

If the former (instalments agreed and being adhered to as per contract) and they are now demanding a lump sum, then you have a case.

If the balance was due and you are not paying it, then it is not surprising they are withholding the wedding dress against the money owed.

Your argument would be that they are holding a £2200 dress against a £650 debt.

elsien

lincroft1710 wrote: »

This reminds me of the "right of way at a roundabout/junction" scenario.

"Yes I could see the other driver was in the wrong and I could have stopped but I had right of way. Still, I will be out of hospital very soon"

Tracey, you probably have "right" on your side, but sadly you are not in the driving seat and hold no aces. It could take 4 weeks just to get the legal processes moving, a hearing may not even happen before your wedding day! Even if it does, you may not win, and if you do you may not get the dress back in time.

See if you can raise the money on Crowdfunding or similar.

Finally, it may be the shop not being truthful, but if the bridesmaids' dresses manufacturer won't supply the dresses without being paid in full by the shop, it suggests the shop may have credit problems with its supplier(s)

Realistically, how many people would be willing to pay for someone else's bridesmaid dresses? As good causes go, it's not going to be top of the list, is it?

FtbDreaming

Id demand the wedding dress as its paid for and if she doesn't give it to you tell her youre going to go to the local papers and social media to ruin their reputation.... its a lot of money to be demanding. You aren't refusing to pay just unable to pay in full. They think they have you by the short and curlies, I’d have to fight back x

waamo

FtbDreaming wrote: »

Id demand the wedding dress as its paid for and if she doesn't give it to you tell her youre going to go to the local papers and social media to ruin their reputation.... its a lot of money to be demanding. You aren't refusing to pay just unable to pay in full. They think they have you by the short and curlies, I’d have to fight back x

You wouldn't even need to practice the sad face as it would probably be genuine when your getting married in jeans and a tee shirt.

Tracey_m

The shop was aware I wasn’t the one paying for the bridemaids dresses. I ever put any deposit I’m down in my name.. My sister in law made 3 separate payments to make up the initial deposit and dresses were ordered 4 weeks after I was in the shop looking at the dresses.. as my sister in law isn’t paying the remaining balance.. they said I’m liable as inthe bride. Which I have said I will take responsibility for. I have offered to set a direct debit up to pay remainder of the dresses even thou I don’t need them anymore as I had to get new ones as my sister in law had cancelled. but the dress shop won’t accept my payment plan and therefore holding my wedding shop and veil to the amount of 2500 altogether.. All paid in full before any bridemaids dresses were ordered..
all correspondence for bridemaids dresses were between my sister in law and the shop until my sister in law refused the pay the remaining balance.
Wedding dress and veil were paid in full on 27th April..

Bridemaid dresses ordered on 24th may

Bermonia

As has been suggested by many on here already... right or wrong doesn’t really matter at this stage, the legal action you are considering could take months.

Your effort would be better spent trying to come up with a solution to pay the outstanding balance for the dresses, whilst not a tiny amount... certainly by no means insurmountable.

Ultimately if you already have the ‘advice’ of a solicitor and you are not open to hearing others who have suggested the legal route would be a mistake, then I am unsure what else anyone can tell you.

waamo

Court can take up to 12 months. What you do is up to you.

Aylesbury_Duck

Tracey_m wrote: »

The shop was aware I wasn’t the one paying for the bridemaids dresses. I ever put any deposit I’m down in my name.. My sister in law made 3 separate payments to make up the initial deposit and dresses were ordered 4 weeks after I was in the shop looking at the dresses.. as my sister in law isn’t paying the remaining balance.. they said I’m liable as inthe bride. Which I have said I will take responsibility for. I have offered to set a direct debit up to pay remainder of the dresses even thou I don’t need them anymore as I had to get new ones as my sister in law had cancelled. but the dress shop won’t accept my payment plan and therefore holding my wedding shop and veil to the amount of 2500 altogether.. All paid in full before any bridemaids dresses were ordered..
all correspondence for bridemaids dresses were between my sister in law and the shop until my sister in law refused the pay the remaining balance.
Wedding dress and veil were paid in full on 27th April..

Bridemaid dresses ordered on 24th may

I think that by now, you've convinced everyone that the shop is in the wrong and you have a right to your dress. I don't see anyone disagreeing with that view.

There is no point preaching to the converted. As Bermonia says, you have been advised to spend your time finding the money to effect a speedy resolution rather than consulting solicitors and commencing legal action which could take weeks or even months to take effect.

What ideas have you got for raising the outstanding balance on the bridesmaid dresses? That's the pragmatic question. It might feel like an injustice, but what is your priority? Proving you're right or getting your dress in time? If it's the former, crack on with legal action but find a new dress in the meantime.

bris

If both contracts are in the brides name then the wedding dress is being held by way of a "Lein". I cant see why a Lein wouldn't be allowed in this situation.

It would take the courts to decide and could go either way but it would be a gamble to take it to court due to the fees involved.


P.s posted at same time as above. I am not convinced the op is right at all, bottom line there is a reason the dress is being held, the shop clearly think they are going to be bumped for the dresses, I would do the same thing.

waamo

bris wrote: »

If both contracts are in the brides name then the wedding dress is being held by way of a "Lein". I cant see why a Lein wouldn't be allowed in this situation.

It would take the courts to decide and could go either way but it would be a gamble to take it to court due to the fees involved.


P.s posted at same time as above. I am not convinced the op is right at all, bottom line there is a reason the dress is being held, the shop clearly think they are going to be bumped for the dresses, I would do the same thing.

I'm inclined to agree. This isn't absolutely cut and dried. A court case is a gamble and if the op lost attempting to get the goods returned they will be even further out of pocket and still have no dress.