Do i have any chance of defending this claim?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

confusedsoul said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sounds a bit of a mess OP.

Are you a business?

How many months (exactly) is months later? 

What was the item and the fault?

Did you document it working correctly (or can you once it gets back to you)?

Yes as a business

9 months later

The item was a camera and he said the motion detection was not working. I set it up and for a whole week it worked perfectly.

Unfortuanteley not i did not document it, i offered to have a look remoteley from the onset, as its a common occurence where a lot of people dont know how to set the camera up properly, he said it used to work properly but was now faulty. He denied my assistance citing security risks to his network etc

Thanks OP.

As far as consumer rights go after 6 months it is no longer taken there was an issue with the goods so after the first inspection you should have advised the goods were fine and if the buyer wishes to seek a remedy they will need to have the goods independently inspected to demonstrate they did not conform to the contract on the day of delivery.

With regards to the warranty, if this is offered by the manufacturer the buyer should deal with them, unless the terms state you as the retailer have involvement but without there being an issue present the buyer doesn't have a claim on the warranty either way. I don't know if the manufacturer expects you to check the buyer's claims before returning the goods to them or has terms imposing any fees, on you or the buyer, for warranty returns that have nothing wrong with them?

With regards to the situation you are in now, simply refunding the buyer doesn't necessarily mean done deal as suggested above as AFAIK claiming the filing fee back via small claims is expected. 

The issue is with the merit of the buyer's claims, did they have one to begin with and (with the second claim) without a letter before action will they see they chance of costs being awarded affected. 

You have 2 choices, either pay the extra £35/£70* for this to go away or document the goods working correctly, refuse the refund, send the goods back and advise you'll be claiming your costs if he decides to go via small claims and without an independent inspection confirming the goods did not conform they are not entitled to a remedy. 

If your supplier will inspect the goods and confirm there's nothing wrong with them all the better as you'll have an expert opinion to support your position. 

I ran a business on eBay for a long time and completely understand how you feel about the buyer getting your back up, generally after 6 months there's no claim with eBay (or Paypal if the byer used that during eBay Checkout), I'm not sure on the timeframes for chargebacks and they can be difficult to defend via eBay for SNAD but should you ever find yourself in a similar position making it clear to the buyer that after 6 months the burden of proof is on them (should you wish to be nice and have it back for an inspection that's fine and can benefit you) this way you've made the position very clear.

*It's seems unclear whether the buyer has filed actually filed the second claim yet. 

born_again

Not sure on basis he would have a claim for you reversing the refund if he had not returned the item.

Given the mention of disposing of the camera, & not returning it. I would double check that they are returning the correct camera before any refund.

sheramber

After claiming he had disposed of it and couldn't retrieve he suddenly was able to get it.

Makes one wonder who he disposed of it to. 

JetpackVelociraptor

Just to be clear, was the buyer making a claim on a warranty that your company provides? Or is it a warranty provided by your supplier? Because if that, you could have just informed him how to claim with them and left him to it.

Given the circumstances now, if you still wish to accept the return I think you should send him a clearly worded email explaining that although you have tested the product and found it worked as intended you are prepared to offer him the option to return it for a full refund as a gesture of goodwill, in full and final settlement of the matter and that this does not constitute acceptance of fault or liability. Include in the email how he needs to return the product (i.e. safely, well packaged and in good usable condition or any other ordinary restrictions you would include on that), how you will refund him (PayPal), and when you will refund him (for eg within 48 hours of the item being received, subject to inspection).

If you don't want to accept the return now, and I wouldn't blame you at all, I would send him an email explaining that your previous offer was made as as gesture of goodwill, not admittance of liability or fault, and was contingent on him returning the item. As he has now attempted to falsely claim a full refund from you without returning the product you have withdrawn your offer. Tell him to take whatever further action he sees fit, and to direct any further correspondence to your solicitors (if you have them) or just that you look forward to having your day in court.

confusedsoul

Thanks a lot for all the help guys. 

He has returned my camera and I have also received a MCOL. 

I will defend the claim as I have his messages stating he discarded the item and now he has sent it back to me. 

born_again

confusedsoul said:

Thanks a lot for all the help guys. 

He has returned my camera and I have also received a MCOL. 

I will defend the claim as I have his messages stating he discarded the item and now he has sent it back to me. 

Is it the one you sent them?

Jenni_D

If you now have the camera (and it is the one you sent him, and it is undamaged and still works OK) then you have no right to withhold the refund - he will likely win any claim.

screech_78

Jenni_D said:

If you now have the camera (and it is the one you sent him, and it is undamaged and still works OK) then you have no right to withhold the refund - he will likely win any claim.

I don’t think the OP was ever going to withhold a refund. They said they were happy to pay this. However, the buyer has added on £70 for the MCOL claims which the OP doesn’t (quite rightly) want to pay. 

tightauldgit

Jenni_D said:

If you now have the camera (and it is the one you sent him, and it is undamaged and still works OK) then you have no right to withhold the refund - he will likely win any claim.

I think he would still be within his rights to refuse the refund on the grounds the camera isn't faulty but yes he would have to either refund the money or return the camera and it seems that a refund would be easier at this stage. I wouldn't be entertaining any other claims for additional money though.  

confusedsoul

Hi

Yes he sent the correct camera back and it’s as expected. 

I am happy to refund the money for the camera but not the extra £70. 

Thanks