Practical advice on checking & refusing furniture delivery?

Okell

born_again said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

born_again said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

Do you have anything confirming that the CC company are obliged to refund within 14 days, or are you simply basing that on the fact that the trader is meant to refund within 14 days so therefore the credit provider under a s75 claim must have the same obligation (ie no more than 14 days)?

That's the one  

I think you may find that while CC is jointly liable, that the 14 day refund only applies to the company purchased from. 
Or the vast majority of S75 case would fall foul of the regulation.

It is certainly not something FOS have brought up in cases taken to them. 

If the consumer has the right to reject under Section 20 of the CRA against the cc I can't see why paragraph (15) wouldn't apply to cc either?

Worth noting the 14 days rule includes beginning with the day on which the trader agrees that the consumer is entitled to a refund so when a TV is "faulty" establishing that is such isn't included in the 14 days.

However with something like furniture that is damaged upon delivery/has visible defects it is apparent they do not conform simply by looking at the goods and thus the trader has no option but to agree once they have seen the goods (which can be done via photographs these days).   

So when a company does not agree, then there is no 14 day timescale. 

CC again will be from the date they agree to refund. So is only relevant once a refund is agreed. 🤷‍♀️

S75 take as long as they take, due to the information required from the customer to prove the breech. Once CC has looked at this, then they will make the decision. Usual rule is once decision reached customer will be advised & letter sent to confirm payment is full & final settlement. Once received back payment made. Usually within a day or 2.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

born_again said:

So when a company does not agree, then there is no 14 day timescale. 

CC again will be from the date they agree to refund. So is only relevant once a refund is agreed. 🤷‍♀️

I guess it's a case of not being able to disagree with something that is matter of fact.

I'd imagine most people just go with the flow (with retailer or cc) but if someone sent a LBA with 14 days to resolve and then filed through small claims I can't see they can be penalised for this, obviously the consumer has no obligation to go through the bank's customer service process for a S75 claim. 

(That's not to suggest firing off an LBA in the first instance, just hypothetical).  

Over 40 years ago I actually studied the application of s75 under a chap named Tony Guest who co-edited the legal profession's Encyclopedia of Consumer Credit Law.  (Anthony Guest - Wikipedia )

I suspect that when s75 was drafted it was envisaged that it would only ever come into play when a consumer had already reached the stage of suing a trader and it gave the consumer the option to join the credit provider as a joint defendant (or respondent).  So it gave the consumer an additional party to sue if the trader refused to pay up or had gone bust.

I doubt it was ever considered that credit providers would set up their own "s75 processes" or that a consumer would be able to make a s75 claim directly under the creditor's own scheme rather than having to sue them.

Similarly I doubt that credit providers and/or the FOS have ever considered whether the creditor is bound by s20(15) of the CRA in the same way as a trader is.

(As is probably obvious, in the intervening 40 years I have completely forgotten everything Prof Guest explained to us.  Too many pints of Okells)

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Okell said:

Over 40 years ago I actually studied the application of s75 under a chap named Tony Guest who co-edited the legal profession's Encyclopedia of Consumer Credit Law.  (Anthony Guest - Wikipedia )

I suspect that when s75 was drafted it was envisaged that it would only ever come into play when a consumer had already reached the stage of suing a trader and it gave the consumer the option to join the credit provider as a joint defendant (or respondent).  So it gave the consumer an additional party to sue if the trader refused to pay up or had gone bust.

I doubt it was ever considered that credit providers would set up their own "s75 processes" or that a consumer would be able to make a s75 claim directly under the creditor's own scheme rather than having to sue them.

Similarly I doubt that credit providers and/or the FOS have ever considered whether the creditor is bound by s20(15) of the CRA in the same way as a trader is.

(As is probably obvious, in the intervening 40 years I have completely forgotten everything Prof Guest explained to us.  Too many pints of Okells)

Indeed  

Although I doubt 40 years no one could imagine just how rampant our consumption would become and more importantly that our system would rely on growth so strongly to function. 

Consumer rights aren't really here to make sure consumers have a good time, rather that they have confidence to continue spending.

I'm sure the banks would love to be free of the shackles of S75 (and many of the other regulations they have to abide by) but if S75 can have a "bottomless pit" of funding and banks aren't anywhere near breaking point because of it I don't see much changing. 

CupofTea22

Okell said:

It's a pity the OP hasn't returned to answer the questions asked:

1.  are you still in a position to withdraw your offer to buy (ie goods have not yet been dispatched and you have not yet received an email confirming dispatch)?

2.  when did you order the goods?

3.  what was the indicated timescale for delivery?

4.  if delivery is now outside the indicated timescale, have you given the trader a deadline for delivery under s28(7) Consumer Rights Act 2015?

1. We don't want to withdraw as would like the furniture delivered.

3. Delivery on website stated 2-4 weeks.  Chased at 3 weeks to make sure we got a delivery status update or date. Given a delivery date 11 days after the end of the 4 weeks. Now delayed an extra 3 days.

4. We haven't, may have to do that!

I was trying to see what, if any, control we had of the situation in case something does go wrong. Worst case scenario (if items missing or broken, or if trying to get a refund) is that things drag out for weeks/months and we miss out on having outdoor furniture for the summer.

Okell

CupofTea22 said:

Okell said:

It's a pity the OP hasn't returned to answer the questions asked:

1.  are you still in a position to withdraw your offer to buy (ie goods have not yet been dispatched and you have not yet received an email confirming dispatch)?

2.  when did you order the goods?

3.  what was the indicated timescale for delivery?

4.  if delivery is now outside the indicated timescale, have you given the trader a deadline for delivery under s28(7) Consumer Rights Act 2015?

1. We don't want to withdraw as would like the furniture delivered.  OK

3. Delivery on website stated 2-4 weeks.  Chased at 3 weeks to make sure we got a delivery status update or date. Given a delivery date 11 days after the end of the 4 weeks. Now delayed an extra 3 days.  OK

4. We haven't, may have to do that!  OK, but if they miss the deadline what will you do?  The legislation - read the link I gave - allows you to treat the contract as at an end (ie you are entitled to a refund) if they miss the deadline, but that's no good if you want the furniture.  (Although if they miss the deadline I suppose you could try to negotiate a price reduction with them.)

I was trying to see what, if any, control we had of the situation in case something does go wrong. Worst case scenario (if items missing or broken, or if trying to get a refund) is that things drag out for weeks/months and we miss out on having outdoor furniture for the summer.

See reponses in bold italic.

You haven't answered 2.    So did you place the order about 6(?) weeks ago?

In terms of what control you have over the situation if something goes wrong, your statutory legal rights give you a right to reject the goods within 30 days if they do not comply to contract.  (eg not of satisfactory quality, not as described).  Unless you have agreed to return the faulty goods at your cost, the seller must collect them or pay for their return.  The seller must refund you within 14 days of agreeing that you are entitled to a refund.

AIUI that is the extent of your rights if you don't want to withdraw your offer to buy.

Although you mentioned refusing delivery in the title of this thread, that's a non-flyer unless you've decided you don't want the goods at all (which is not what you've said you want).  Even if you attempted to refuse delivery I'm not at all certain that would work.  The courier is just as likely to leave the goods at kerbside.  Technically the goods might still remain at the seller's risk, but if you want to try to avoid complications I'd suggest that is not the way to go.

Your idea of inspecting the goods and "refusing delivery" if they don't comply is really you exercising the 30 day right to reject - os summarised above - rather than you refusing delivery.

Of course there is nothing to stop you trying to get the deliverer to wait while you inspect the goods, but it's not a course of action I would want to rely on and seems contrary to your wish to avoid complications and delay.

I think if I were you I'd stop worrying about what will happen if the goods are faulty or parts are missing and wait to cross that bridge if it happens