Faulty TV written off refund or replacement

zoob

mattyprice4004 said:

zoob said:

Costco isn't a retail store its a private members discount warehouse, so legally CRA2015 i suspect doesn't apply.
They may follow the CRA2015 rules but it might not have any legal standing 

You suspect wrong.
Please educate yourself before trying to give ‘advice’ as pretty much everything you have posted in this message is nonsense.  

Yes I did suspect wrongly and after educating myself have confirmed that CRA2015 does apply but still correct in stating that it's a private members discount warehouse as you have to be a paid member to purchase instore

Maybe mp4004 should educate themselves also before stating that everything that I'd posted on this message is nonsense 
I'm more than happy to admit when in wrong, wonder if mp4004 will do the same 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

MarvinDay said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

MarvinDay said:

shiraz99 said:

MarvinDay said:

Bradden said:

shiraz99 said:

Bradden said:

shiraz99 said:

zoob said:

Costco isn't a retail store its a private members discount warehouse, so legally CRA2015 i suspect doesn't apply.
They may follow the CRA2015 rules but it might not have any legal standing 

Your "suspicion" is completely without merit.

I'm not 100% it's that simple.. they do offer different memberships for business customers which may legally come under B2B legislation even if they don't apply it.

A business customer purchasing for themselves is not necessarily a B2B contract, CRA will still apply. Only purely B2B purchases will not be covered by the CRA.

Agreed... I was just highlighting that some purchases from Costco could be considered by them as B2B if they desired - they may choose not to apply them which is in the customer's interest. I still disagree with your "completely without merit" comment- I think Zoob was correct it stating that CRA rules may not apply to all pruchases from Costco even if they don't enforce this. 

But that's not what the earlier post from Zoob stated.
There post was very clear that as Costco wasn't a retail store, they didn't think that CRA applied..

zoob said:

Costco isn't a retail store its a private members discount warehouse, so legally CRA2015 i suspect doesn't apply.
They may follow the CRA2015 rules but it might not have any legal standing 

Even though Costco may not be purely a retail store, a great many of the members are consumers and are acting as consumers when making purchases there.
This is where Costco differs from places such as Makro which is a trade only establishment.

Even with Makro, or any other "trade only" retailer you can still make purchases as a consumer, for example I could make a personal purchase using my own bank card and therefore CRA would apply.

I think it would be very hard to convince a court that the CRA would apply to any Makro purchases.
With Makro (now actually Bookers), you need to provide company details when signing up for an account (Company cheque book or bank account details, registered address etc) and you agree that all purchases will be for trade use only.
Their T&C's when signing up are very clear

1. Goods for sale are intended for and sold on the condition that they are for resale, commercial and industrial use only. Any purchases are deemed to be for business use and the Card Holder is not considered or deemed to be a consumer.

and there are also clear signs in their store that all purchases are deemed to be trade only.
It's not as if there is any ambiguity in what you are signing up for when applying for a card or actually buying anything.

But of course their terms don't override consumer rights. 

I still think that it's not hard to hope that a sensible court could decide that as the person making the purchase acted fraudulently (under the Fraud act 2006) and that the trader wouldn't have allowed them to become members had they known their true purchasing status, the purchaser didn't have any consumer rights.

After all, any contract entered into fraudulently can be deemed to be void and unenforceable and if this was the case, the court could easily dismiss any claim by the purchaser. 

I realise that this is all if's. maybe's and could's but isn't that the case with a great many of the discussions on here?

Your post reads as if it refers to people pretending to be a business to get a membership. I'm sure that happens but the fear of getting caught would stop most people, I'm also sure in an online only environment that would happen more often as the person doesn't have the worry of looking guilty as they walk in the store or stand at the till and so the fear of getting caught is diminished.

However what I'm sure is common, and was referred to above, is that genuine businesses shop for two things, stuff they need for their business and some stuff they need for themselves. 

If you go back to sweets and meat, Bookers could ask why you keep buying meat if you run a sweet shop but they won't because the arrangement suits them, they have increased trade and sit in a position where they don't offer consumer rights for the personal purchases. 

Either the likes of Bookers should be more strict on purchases or they should accept they need to offer consumer rights for consumer purchases, but neither will happen because again what happens now suits them perfectly and for the smaller shoppers it probably suits them too, "trade" food is often nicer than the stuff in the supermarkets at a price that is worth paying, particularly when stuff is on offer.

The advantage for bigger shoppers in a place like Bookers is that if you spend a small fortunate in their store they are more likely to want to keep your business. Massive companies, like Amazon for example, don't care if they lose one customer regardless of what they spend, these wholesaler places however are much less likely to argue with a customer who is spending £20k a year and has a problem with a single purchase.

sheramber

MarvinDay said:

shiraz99 said:

MarvinDay said:

Bradden said:

shiraz99 said:

Bradden said:

shiraz99 said:

zoob said:

Costco isn't a retail store its a private members discount warehouse, so legally CRA2015 i suspect doesn't apply.
They may follow the CRA2015 rules but it might not have any legal standing 

Your "suspicion" is completely without merit.

I'm not 100% it's that simple.. they do offer different memberships for business customers which may legally come under B2B legislation even if they don't apply it.

A business customer purchasing for themselves is not necessarily a B2B contract, CRA will still apply. Only purely B2B purchases will not be covered by the CRA.

Agreed... I was just highlighting that some purchases from Costco could be considered by them as B2B if they desired - they may choose not to apply them which is in the customer's interest. I still disagree with your "completely without merit" comment- I think Zoob was correct it stating that CRA rules may not apply to all pruchases from Costco even if they don't enforce this. 

But that's not what the earlier post from Zoob stated.
There post was very clear that as Costco wasn't a retail store, they didn't think that CRA applied..

zoob said:

Costco isn't a retail store its a private members discount warehouse, so legally CRA2015 i suspect doesn't apply.
They may follow the CRA2015 rules but it might not have any legal standing 

Even though Costco may not be purely a retail store, a great many of the members are consumers and are acting as consumers when making purchases there.
This is where Costco differs from places such as Makro which is a trade only establishment.

Even with Makro, or any other "trade only" retailer you can still make purchases as a consumer, for example I could make a personal purchase using my own bank card and therefore CRA would apply.

I think it would be very hard to convince a court that the CRA would apply to any Makro purchases.
With Makro (now actually Bookers), you need to provide company details when signing up for an account (Company cheque book or bank account details, registered address etc) and you agree that all purchases will be for trade use only.
Their T&C's when signing up are very clear

1. Goods for sale are intended for and sold on the condition that they are for resale, commercial and industrial use only. Any purchases are deemed to be for business use and the Card Holder is not considered or deemed to be a consumer.

and there are also clear signs in their store that all purchases are deemed to be trade only.
It's not as if there is any ambiguity in what you are signing up for when applying for a card or actually buying anything.

Booker offered cards to my work  which was all office workers.

Gycraig

I’m confused surely it would be better to get a refund and buy a new tele ? Doesn’t tech for teles get cheaper every year ?