any advice (if any) greaty received

Manxman_in_exile

tightauldgit said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

tightauldgit said:

I do appreciate but in such an instance they either have to decline the work, give an extended timeframe or run of the risk of giving the consumer a price reduction. 

For the works involved I don't think it is (yet) an unreasonable time, but that might change if the OP told then they needed the camper for x date beforehand. 

'Reasonable time' will include lead time on parts though. And if there are delays outwith the control of the garage then it's reasonable that those are also factored in. Garage would have to show they made reasonable efforts to determine the lead time and to source the parts but they can't be expected to be clairvoyant.

Without getting in to too much of a debate If the parts were itemised then my understanding is this was a contract for the sale of goods and as delivery of the goods was essential at the time the OP could treat the contract at an end and not have to pay for the parts (or be refunded for them).

Without the parts the trader can't perform the service. 

If the parts weren't itemised then, from a recent thread on here, it's a transfer of goods and the price reduction rule would apply (to parts as well as service as the two are under one price and a value has not be assigned specifically to the goods) instead. 

As I say I don't think it's unreasonable due the circumstances but we are at 3 weeks and there obviously comes a point where it is unreasonable. 

The regulations mention reasonable where 

(a)the contract does not expressly fix the time for the service to be performed, and does not say how it is to be fixed, and

(b)information that is to be treated under section 50 as included in the contract does not fix the time either.

Section 50 mentions that anything that is said or written to the consumer, by or on behalf of the trader, about the trader or the service forms part of the contract, something like "of course we'll have it done by your holiday" would form a part of the contract. 

If the holiday deadline was part of the contract and isn't met then there should be a repeat performance but that must be done without significant inconvenience and missing your camper holiday when it was known at the time would fall under that IMO leaving a price reduction up to the full contract price minus any extra works, such as the floor, that have been performed.

The parts issue is a bit like the delivery issue on the other thread, the agreement between the trader and whoever they get the parts from isn't anything to do with the consumer and a trader supplying parts they don't have in their possession needs to ensure their contract is formed with that in mind to cover any risk of the consumer being entitled to treat the contract at an end or being entitled to a price reduction. 

... Nowhere does the law suggest that traders should be held responsible for things outside of their control or their lack of clairvoyance...

Then why does the law hold sellers responsible for manufacturing faults that they have no control over and couldn't reasonably foresee?

As a general princilpe of law - particularly consumer law - a trader no longer needs to be "at fault" to be held liable for all manner of things.

Anni_nOMin_oustwo

TELLIT01 said:

Anni...... is really somewhere between the rocks and a hard place.  Working on the assumption that the company has ordered the parts, and the delay is beyond their control, the options are very limited.  If the parts don't arrive in time and the OP can't manage without the motorhome, the company needs to be given sufficient time to reassemble the elements which need to be reinstated.  I would certainly be looking for that work to be done at a reduced price, if not free of charge.  There would seem to be little to be gained by saying the motorhome will be taken elsewhere as presumably they would have the same supply issue.

Yes I won't wait until the last minute so they can have time  re-install the items to make it useable for my holiday

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

Nowhere does the law suggest that traders should be held responsible for things outside of their control or their lack of clairvoyance. 

Sorry but the supply of parts is completely within the trader's control, they are perfectly entitled to order the parts and then form a contract with their customer once the parts are in their hands.

The reason most places wouldn't is because they don't want to be left with parts but the customer changes their mind/goes elsewhere so they tie the customer to the contract for their benefit, in turn the legislation protects the consumer from being tied to the contract for pro-longed periods without performance which I'll break down below and then step away as I don't want to distract from the OP too much (although the below will layout their position clearly).  

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/59/enacted

"delivery” means voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another;

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/28/enacted

(1)This section applies to any sales contract.

(3)Unless there is an agreed time or period, the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must deliver the goods—

(a)without undue delay, and

(b)in any event, not more than 30 days after the day on which the contract is entered into.

(4)In this section—

(a)an “agreed” time or period means a time or period agreed by the trader and the consumer for delivery of the goods;

(b)if there is an obligation to deliver the goods at the time the contract is entered into, that time counts as the “agreed” time.

(5)Subsections (6) and (7) apply if the trader does not deliver the goods in accordance with subsection (3) or at the agreed time or within the agreed period.

(6)If the circumstances are that—

(a)the trader has refused to deliver the goods, [refused means has not occurred  as per section (5), saying sorry it's late is effectively refused because they aren't meeting the terms of the contract]

(b)delivery of the goods at the agreed time or within the agreed period is essential taking into account all the relevant circumstances at the time the contract was entered into, or

(c)the consumer told the trader before the contract was entered into that delivery in accordance with subsection (3), or at the agreed time or within the agreed period, was essential,

then the consumer may treat the contract as at an end.

(7)In any other circumstances, the consumer may specify a period that is appropriate in the circumstances and require the trader to deliver the goods before the end of that period.

(8)If the consumer specifies a period under subsection (7) but the goods are not delivered within that period, then the consumer may treat the contract as at an end.

(9)If the consumer treats the contract as at an end under subsection (6) or (8), the trader must without undue delay reimburse all payments made under the contract.

This applies if the parts were assigned a specific price and as such are classed as a sales contract:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/5/enacted

(1)A contract is a sales contract if under it—

(a)the trader transfers or agrees to transfer ownership of goods to the consumer, and

(b)the consumer pays or agrees to pay the price. 

As OP mentions "quotation dated 14th March with all parts and labour listed" this implies a sales contract but doesn't specifically state prices were laid out for parts, assuming they were it means it was a sales contract and the above means that if delivery does not occur at the agreed time usually the consumer has to give another timeframe but as it was obviously essential in this instance due to the holiday the OP doesn't and may treat the contract at an end.

The above is fairly balanced between both parties and the relationship between trader and their supplier, the weather, the end of the world, does not override the consumer's rights to treat the contract at an end in accordance with the above. It's a matter of fact.

The guidance notes stipulate:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/notes/division/3/1/3/2/1

A contract would be a contract for transfer rather than a sales contract if either (i) there is no monetary value assigned, or (ii) the contract is a mixed contract whether for a monetary price or not and, whilst goods are supplied, the transfer of goods is not sufficiently central to the contract to be a sales contract. If no monetary value is assigned to the goods, this does not preclude money from forming part of the consideration of the contract. For example, if the trader offers goods A in exchange for goods B and a cash fee, no value has been assigned to either goods A or B so the contract would fall under section 8, despite some money changing hands. 

It was stated here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6429582/double-glazing-fitter-trying-to-charge-for-cancelled-work/p4

by a respected poster

If the contract doesn't set the price for the window [goods], there is a contract for the transfer of goods but not a contract for sale of goods. 

tightauldgit said:

If the supplier tells you he can fix something in 2 weeks while knowing a part has an 8 week lead time then it's unreasonable. If he quotes you 10 and then the supplier delivers late and it ends up being 14 then that could well be reasonable if the trader has taken reasonable steps to source the parts in a timely manner. Equally as much as a consumer can cry that they demand it's fixed in a month it's not reasonable to expect that. 

Please take the time to see what was posted above, the reasonable time element for a service to be performed only applies if no timeframe was given:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/52/enacted

Service to be performed within a reasonable time

(1)This section applies to a contract to supply a service, if—

(a)the contract does not expressly fix the time for the service to be performed, and does not say how it is to be fixed, and

(b)information that is to be treated under section 50 as included in the contract does not fix the time either.

(2)In that case the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must perform the service within a reasonable time.

(3)What is a reasonable time is a question of fact.

(4)See section 54 for a consumer’s rights if the trader is in breach of a term that this section requires to be treated as included in a contract.

Section 50 says

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/50/enacted

(1)Every contract to supply a service is to be treated as including as a term of the contract anything that is said or written to the consumer, by or on behalf of the trader, about the trader or the service, if—

(a)it is taken into account by the consumer when deciding to enter into the contract, or

(b)it is taken into account by the consumer when making any decision about the service after entering into the contract.

(2)Anything taken into account by the consumer as mentioned in subsection (1)(a) or (b) is subject to—

(a)anything that qualified it and was said or written to the consumer by the trader on the same occasion, and

(b)any change to it that has been expressly agreed between the consumer and the trader (before entering into the contract or later).

(4)A change to any of the information mentioned in subsection (3), made before entering into the contract or later, is not effective unless expressly agreed between the consumer and the trader.

(5)See section 54 for a consumer’s rights if the trader is in breach of a term that this section requires to be treated as included in a contract.

Where the service is not performed to a stated timeframe 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/54/enacted

(2)In this section and section 55 a reference to a service conforming to a contract is a reference to—

(a)the service being performed in accordance with section 49 [this is reasonable care and skill], or

(b)the service conforming to a term that section 50 requires to be treated as included in the contract and that relates to the performance of the service.

(3)If the service does not conform to the contract, the consumer’s rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—

(a)the right to require repeat performance (see section 55);

(b)the right to a price reduction (see section 56).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/55/enacted

(1)The right to require repeat performance is a right to require the trader to perform the service again, to the extent necessary to complete its performance in conformity with the contract.

(2)If the consumer requires such repeat performance, the trader—

(a)must provide it within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer; and

(b)must bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour or materials).

(3)The consumer cannot require repeat performance if completing performance of the service in conformity with the contract is impossible.

(4)Any question as to what is a reasonable time or significant inconvenience is to be determined taking account of—

(a)the nature of the service, and

(b)the purpose for which the service was to be performed.

Followed by price reduction:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/56/enacted

(1)The right to a price reduction is the right to require the trader to reduce the price to the consumer by an appropriate amount (including the right to receive a refund for anything already paid above the reduced amount).

(2)The amount of the reduction may, where appropriate, be the full amount of the price.

(3)A consumer who has that right and the right to require repeat performance is only entitled to a price reduction in one of these situations—

(a)because of section 55(3) the consumer cannot require repeat performance; or

(b)the consumer has required repeat performance, but the trader is in breach of the requirement of section 55(2)(a) to do it within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.

The legislation is very clear and the trader had every control over the contract, they had the choice to form it or not and they had the choice to impose a deadline or other conditions (including ones that would not have suited the customer and lost their custom).

Anni_nOMin_oustwo

Just an update... No news as yet, but I have been in contact with a competitors dealership down south, and they tell me Whale are struggling to make these heaters and there is a UK shortage, they have had to refund a customer recently, these heaters are rarer than hens teeth it would appear, and they are only taking advance orders from May at the earliest now. They are made in Northern Ireland which doesn't help. I have had an email from WHALE themselves saying there are delays and shortages and they can't give a definate answer on when they will be available.

Anni_nOMin_oustwo

My thoughts are now, to email my dealership armed with this information and request that my motorhome is made available to collect and use without the heater from May 5th, and arrange to have the heater fitted on return from holiday and negotiate a new cost.
What do you think of that idea folks.

Aylesbury_Duck

That seems a pragmatic way forward.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Anni_nOMin_oustwo said:

My thoughts are now, to email my dealership armed with this information and request that my motorhome is made available to collect and use without the heater from May 5th, and arrange to have the heater fitted on return from holiday and negotiate a new cost.
What do you think of that idea folks.

Without any guarantee of delivery of the heater by the holiday I would agree it's sensible to get the van put back now and look to have the heater done at a later date. 

With a known supply problem it makes you wonder why the garage offered to take the van apart... 

I hope you negotiate strongly with them to pay as little as possible for the unnecessary works  

Anni_nOMin_oustwo

Yes, I'll have to argue the inconvenience and pay the agreed price but no more than the 2.2k quoted. I'll pay pro-rata for works done so far, and no extra because it is plain to see that there was a supply issue when they quoted and accepted the work, and they must have been aware of this issue.

Anni_nOMin_oustwo

I have sent the email to my dealership- she has told me the technician will have my vehicle ready to collect in the working state I have asked for failing the part arriving in time. Interestingly she told me that Nova, their suppliers, told them a different story when the part was ordered

Nearlyold

Just a thought - would the water damage have escalated if disassembly had been postponed to a time when the required new part was in the repairers possession.