Bespoke kitchen worktop not to specs

SuzyShoes

@Olinda99 @pinkshoes
Thank you both. 
I will send an email in that format - I wasn't sure if I needed to use any particular phrasing about it not being fit for purpose, but perhaps I don't. And if they aren't agreeable to that I'll try PayPal's buyer protection. 
Lesson learned as regards using a credit card through another payment processor  

Okell

pinkshoes said:

SuzyShoes said:

user1977 said:

SuzyShoes said:

Everything I read online says that there's no legal recourse if a product is custom made.

Can you point us to anywhere online which says that? Either it's wrong, or you've misunderstood what it says.

You don't have a "change of mind" right to return a product if it was custom made, but all your other rights still apply.

Perhaps I have misunderstood. I can't post links, but lots of websites (including CAB) say things like "Where customers purchase bespoke or personalised goods, they will be exempt from the cooling off period under the CCR and will no longer have the right to cancel".

What other rights do I have that might apply here?

Thats just for changing your mind.

I'd send them a formal email.

Dear XXX
I made an order online on X date using your software. I made a mistake on this design which could not be edited so you did this for me on X date and invoiced me with the higher price for this new design. I was happy with the design emailed to me so paid.
On X date you delivered an incorrect worktop to me that did not match the approved design. Please can you arrange collection of this incorrect worktop and supply the correct worktop as agreed and paid for.
I see you have also sent a partial refund which would seemingly reflect the price of the incorrect worktop sent. Just to reiterate,  I did not order this worktop. If you cannot supply the correct worktop then please issue a full refund within 14 days and let me know when you'd like to collect this incorrect one. 

@Pinkshoes -  can I take the liberty of slightly tweaking your wording?

Dear XXX

I made an order online on X date using your software. I made a mistake on this design which I could not edit so I contacted your representative [name] who amended the design for me on X date.  We then exchanged emails confirming the amendments (see attached copies) and [name] invoiced me with the higher price for this new design, which I was happy with, and which I paid on 23 December.  (See copy invoice no nnnnnnnn attached).

On X date you delivered an incorrect worktop to me that did not match the design I had previously agreed with [name]. Please can you arrange collection of this incorrect worktop and supply the correct worktop as agreed and which I have already paid for.

I see you have also sent a partial refund which would seemingly to be in respect of feature that I had agreed with [name] but which were missing from the incorrect worktop you sent.

Just to reiterate,  I did not order the worktop you have delivered. If you cannot supply the correct worktop then please issue a full refund within 14 days and let me know when you'd like to collect the incorrect one. 

SuzyShoes

Thank you so for taking the time to reply.

I sent a message last night along the lines of @pinkshoes's message, with a little more detail. 
This morning, the company has written back to say that my cart on the website had never been updated with the amended drawing, so in effect I inadvertently ordered the old, incorrect design, even though I paid the amount quoted for the new design. 
But the reason the cart hadn't been updated is because I no longer had access to the online design tool, in order to update the cart! The sales rep told me she was updating the drawing, but what she actually did was create a new drawing, which was never added to my cart - and I was not told that it hadn't been added to the cart. 
When I received the email quotation from the sales rep with the correct design, which contained a link to pay, I clicked that link, which took me to PayPal, completely bypassing my cart on the website. 

I suppose my case rests on whether it was reasonable for me to assume that the paying directly via the payment link in an email quote would override the fact that a different item was in my cart on the website. 
Also on whether the sales rep is at fault for not informing me that she had not updated my cart with the new design - the customer service manager has since informed me that she would not have been able to do this, but I was not advised of this at the time. 

So the fact remains that I paid for one design and have received something different. 
 
I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

SuzyShoes

To put it more succinctly - I feel like I arranged and confirmed the amended order directly with the sales rep over email, independent of their website. But they feel like, because the original design was still in my cart on the website, that takes precedence over my correspondence with the sales rep, and over the fact that I paid for the amended design. 
Who is correct?? 

born_again

SuzyShoes said:

Thank you so for taking the time to reply.

I sent a message last night along the lines of @pinkshoes's message, with a little more detail. 
This morning, the company has written back to say that my cart on the website had never been updated with the amended drawing, so in effect I inadvertently ordered the old, incorrect design, even though I paid the amount quoted for the new design. 
But the reason the cart hadn't been updated is because I no longer had access to the online design tool, in order to update the cart! The sales rep told me she was updating the drawing, but what she actually did was create a new drawing, which was never added to my cart - and I was not told that it hadn't been added to the cart. 
When I received the email quotation from the sales rep with the correct design, which contained a link to pay, I clicked that link, which took me to PayPal, completely bypassing my cart on the website. 

I suppose my case rests on whether it was reasonable for me to assume that the paying directly via the payment link in an email quote would override the fact that a different item was in my cart on the website. 
Also on whether the sales rep is at fault for not informing me that she had not updated my cart with the new design - the customer service manager has since informed me that she would not have been able to do this, but I was not advised of this at the time. 

So the fact remains that I paid for one design and have received something different. 
 
I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

FOS only covers financial services. Not kitchen suppliers. Given payment via PayPal you would need to go via them, but I would expect co to contest any dispute.

I think that you need to go back & given the error is by their staff member & not checking that what you were paying was what was actually ordered, That you see if you can reach middle ground on the costs.

SuzyShoes

born_again said:

SuzyShoes said:

Thank you so for taking the time to reply.

I sent a message last night along the lines of @pinkshoes's message, with a little more detail. 
This morning, the company has written back to say that my cart on the website had never been updated with the amended drawing, so in effect I inadvertently ordered the old, incorrect design, even though I paid the amount quoted for the new design. 
But the reason the cart hadn't been updated is because I no longer had access to the online design tool, in order to update the cart! The sales rep told me she was updating the drawing, but what she actually did was create a new drawing, which was never added to my cart - and I was not told that it hadn't been added to the cart. 
When I received the email quotation from the sales rep with the correct design, which contained a link to pay, I clicked that link, which took me to PayPal, completely bypassing my cart on the website. 

I suppose my case rests on whether it was reasonable for me to assume that the paying directly via the payment link in an email quote would override the fact that a different item was in my cart on the website. 
Also on whether the sales rep is at fault for not informing me that she had not updated my cart with the new design - the customer service manager has since informed me that she would not have been able to do this, but I was not advised of this at the time. 

So the fact remains that I paid for one design and have received something different. 
 
I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

FOS only covers financial services. Not kitchen suppliers. Given payment via PayPal you would need to go via them, but I would expect co to contest any dispute.

I think that you need to go back & given the error is by their staff member & not checking that what you were paying was what was actually ordered, That you see if you can reach middle ground on the costs.

The financial ombudsman website has a couple of case studies where they've gotten involved with someone who ordered a custom-made suit that arrived with different measurements, and someone else who received faulty kitchen worktops:
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies?tag=Faulty+Goods

There is apparently a furniture ombudsman - perhaps they are more appropriate.

PayPal have said their buyer protection doesn't cover any custom items 😒

eskbanker

SuzyShoes said:

born_again said:

SuzyShoes said:

I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

FOS only covers financial services. Not kitchen suppliers. Given payment via PayPal you would need to go via them, but I would expect co to contest any dispute.

I think that you need to go back & given the error is by their staff member & not checking that what you were paying was what was actually ordered, That you see if you can reach middle ground on the costs.

The financial ombudsman website has a couple of case studies where they've gotten involved with someone who ordered a custom-made suit that arrived with different measurements, and someone else who received faulty kitchen worktops:
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies?tag=Faulty+Goods

If you paid by credit card then you can make a section 75 claim against the creditor if you're asserting the the supplier has breached the contract, and if you were unhappy with the card provider's decision you could then escalate that to FOS, i.e. their remit only covers the actions of any financial institutions in scope, rather than the merchants themselves.

SuzyShoes

eskbanker said:

SuzyShoes said:

born_again said:

SuzyShoes said:

I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

FOS only covers financial services. Not kitchen suppliers. Given payment via PayPal you would need to go via them, but I would expect co to contest any dispute.

I think that you need to go back & given the error is by their staff member & not checking that what you were paying was what was actually ordered, That you see if you can reach middle ground on the costs.

The financial ombudsman website has a couple of case studies where they've gotten involved with someone who ordered a custom-made suit that arrived with different measurements, and someone else who received faulty kitchen worktops:
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies?tag=Faulty+Goods

If you paid by credit card then you can make a section 75 claim against the creditor if you're asserting the the supplier has breached the contract, and if you were unhappy with the card provider's decision you could then escalate that to FOS, i.e. their remit only covers the actions of any financial institutions in scope, rather than the merchants themselves.

Oh I see! That makes sense. 
We paid through PayPal, but linked to the credit card. So although the money came from the credit card provider, I *think* it's PayPal that we have the contract with.
If you can refute that, though, it would be music to my ears 😄

eskbanker

SuzyShoes said:

eskbanker said:

SuzyShoes said:

born_again said:

SuzyShoes said:

I feel like they are really going to dig their heels in over this. If they won't budge, is it worth taking it to the financial ombudsman? The cost of the whole order was about £1200, of which about £500 was the incorrect worktop. 

FOS only covers financial services. Not kitchen suppliers. Given payment via PayPal you would need to go via them, but I would expect co to contest any dispute.

I think that you need to go back & given the error is by their staff member & not checking that what you were paying was what was actually ordered, That you see if you can reach middle ground on the costs.

The financial ombudsman website has a couple of case studies where they've gotten involved with someone who ordered a custom-made suit that arrived with different measurements, and someone else who received faulty kitchen worktops:
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies?tag=Faulty+Goods

If you paid by credit card then you can make a section 75 claim against the creditor if you're asserting the the supplier has breached the contract, and if you were unhappy with the card provider's decision you could then escalate that to FOS, i.e. their remit only covers the actions of any financial institutions in scope, rather than the merchants themselves.

Oh I see! That makes sense. 
We paid through PayPal, but linked to the credit card. So although the money came from the credit card provider, I *think* it's PayPal that we have the contract with.
If you can refute that, though, it would be music to my ears 😄

If you have a PayPal account and logged into that to make the payment, which then happened to be funded with a payment from your credit card, then that's likely to breach the s75 requirement for a unbroken debtor-creditor-supplier chain.

However, if the merchant puts up a PayPal screen and you simply use that, without using your own PayPal account, then that's regarded differently:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/PayPal-Section75/

Okell

SuzyShoes said:

 
... This morning, the company has written back to say that my cart on the website had never been updated with the amended drawing, so in effect I inadvertently ordered the old, incorrect design, even though I paid the amount quoted for the new design. 
But the reason the cart hadn't been updated is because I no longer had access to the online design tool, in order to update the cart! The sales rep told me she was updating the drawing, but what she actually did was create a new drawing, which was never added to my cart - and I was not told that it hadn't been added to the cart. 
When I received the email quotation from the sales rep with the correct design, which contained a link to pay, I clicked that link, which took me to PayPal, completely bypassing my cart on the website. 

I suppose my case rests on whether it was reasonable for me to assume that the paying directly via the payment link in an email quote would override the fact that a different item was in my cart on the website. 
Also on whether the sales rep is at fault for not informing me that she had not updated my cart with the new design - the customer service manager has since informed me that she would not have been able to do this, but I was not advised of this at the time....
 

SuzyShoes said:

To put it more succinctly - I feel like I arranged and confirmed the amended order directly with the sales rep over email, independent of their website. But they feel like, because the original design was still in my cart on the website, that takes precedence over my correspondence with the sales rep, and over the fact that I paid for the amended design. 
Who is correct?? 

 If I were you I would be strongly disputing this with the supplier.

You made an innocent mistake drafting the original design and found that the website would not allow you to amend it.  You contacted a representative of the supplier and they told you they would do the amendments for you, which they did.

You then exchanged emails confirming the amended design and the supplier's representative sent you an invoice in respect of the amended design, which you paid in good faith.

If the supplier's representative should have updated your cart for you, or should have told you to update it yourself, she did neither.  You are the customer and you can't be expected to know the ins and outs of the supplier's software, whereas the supplier's representative should be expert in it.  This is mostly their fault.*

As I say, you've acted in good faith and after you had exchanged details confirming the amended design and paid for it there was no reason for you to expect that you needed to do anything else - without being told to do so.

It was also reasonable for you to expect that everything was as it should be when you received an invoice for the amended design.  How could you be expected to know that the supplier's rep could raise that invoice without your cart being updated?  No reasonable person would expect the supplier's system to be able to do that.

Keep complaining to them.  And complain on social media too.


*I think you have to accept some blame for basically ignoring the email on 24(?) December.  But again you could argue that you believed in good faith that the amended design had been done and dusted - and paid for.  If somebody really wanted to allocate blame I'd say you were 5% - 10% at fault here