Pages of a Store's commercial Terms not disclosed to me when signing

eskbanker

born_again said:

No chance of S75. In store purchase. Which unless they specifically state you can cancel or change your mind. Is not covered. 

I wouldn't say no chance, in that OP may be able to make a claim of misrepresentation stick, i.e. being induced to enter a contract under a false premise, by virtue of (what OP considers to be) failure to share a key term - not saying it would be straightforward though!

Aylesbury_Duck

I think there may be a loophole here, because OP clearly didn't have the opportunity to read ALL the terms and conditions because they weren't known when they signed.  Whether the finance provider or ultimately a court would consider that sufficient to get OP's deposit back, I don't know.

I do have a little sympathy with the retailer here.  Placing an order and a deposit for a made-to-order piece of furniture when by OP's own admission they weren't completely certain they wanted it, is wasting the retailer's time and perhaps incurring some cost for the retailer.  However, the retailer's processes need tightening so they're not at risk of a potential challenge such as the one OP is considering.

Undervalued

Aylesbury_Duck said:

I think there may be a loophole here, because OP clearly didn't have the opportunity to read ALL the terms and conditions because they weren't known when they signed.  Whether the finance provider or ultimately a court would consider that sufficient to get OP's deposit back, I don't know.

I do have a little sympathy with the retailer here.  Placing an order and a deposit for a made-to-order piece of furniture when by OP's own admission they weren't completely certain they wanted it, is wasting the retailer's time and perhaps incurring some cost for the retailer.  However, the retailer's processes need tightening so they're not at risk of a potential challenge such as the one OP is considering.

Rather negated by the OP signing to say that they have!

From the OP.....

These were all read out and explained, he then asked me to sign the box underneath using my fingertip electronically to "CONFIRM THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

ctsoton

Undervalued said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

I think there may be a loophole here, because OP clearly didn't have the opportunity to read ALL the terms and conditions because they weren't known when they signed.  Whether the finance provider or ultimately a court would consider that sufficient to get OP's deposit back, I don't know.

I do have a little sympathy with the retailer here.  Placing an order and a deposit for a made-to-order piece of furniture when by OP's own admission they weren't completely certain they wanted it, is wasting the retailer's time and perhaps incurring some cost for the retailer.  However, the retailer's processes need tightening so they're not at risk of a potential challenge such as the one OP is considering.

Rather negated by the OP signing to say that they have!

From the OP.....

These were all read out and explained, he then asked me to sign the box underneath using my fingertip electronically to "CONFIRM THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Err no

Only page 1 was shown and explained.

Not sure how that was unclear. 


Page 2 was only printed off and given to me AFTER I had signed and the deposit and finance application had gone through


As for being uncertain. 

I was certain enough to go ahead.  If I had known that I had to be 100% certain at risk of losing my deposit I would have taken more time to decide

I also feel the intentional withholding of key information is unethical, their failure to get back to me about this isn't good enough. Hence why a month later even though I like the sofa and gave them sufficient time to investigate, apologise etc I've had enough and am escalating.

I would have been happy with

A) an apology 
an acknowledgement that it's not how they're trained and the sales guy was in the wrong


Instead all I've had is " can you edit your review please". When I said "I'm not editing it until we've resolved this" I've heard nothing since

ctsoton

The paradox here is

I was asked to sign a contract to acknowledge my deposit is not refundable, even though there's no right to cancel (with implied return of deposit)

So why get customer to effectively sign away a right they don't have to begin with?

MyRealNameToo

ctsoton said:

user1977 said:

It's quite commonplace but I would doubt it's "most".

It's semantics, I assume it's far easier to list stores that do accept returns rather than those that don't.

Yes, because it's vastly shorter as they are the exception. 

Okell

ctsoton said:

... I was asked to sign a contract to acknowledge my deposit is not refundable, even though there's no right to cancel (with implied return of deposit)...

I don't think it's very wise to assume that a right to cancel means a deposit is returnable...

ctsoton

MyRealNameToo said:

ctsoton said:

user1977 said:

It's quite commonplace but I would doubt it's "most".

It's semantics, I assume it's far easier to list stores that do accept returns rather than those that don't.

Yes, because it's vastly shorter as they are the exception. 

I disagree - name a high street retailer or category of retailer that won't accept returns.

As the majority are general goods suppliers not bespoke, the list of dont accept will be far shorter.  And even then there are exceptions - Furniture Village for example

Aylesbury_Duck

Undervalued said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

I think there may be a loophole here, because OP clearly didn't have the opportunity to read ALL the terms and conditions because they weren't known when they signed.  Whether the finance provider or ultimately a court would consider that sufficient to get OP's deposit back, I don't know.

I do have a little sympathy with the retailer here.  Placing an order and a deposit for a made-to-order piece of furniture when by OP's own admission they weren't completely certain they wanted it, is wasting the retailer's time and perhaps incurring some cost for the retailer.  However, the retailer's processes need tightening so they're not at risk of a potential challenge such as the one OP is considering.

Rather negated by the OP signing to say that they have!

From the OP.....

These were all read out and explained, he then asked me to sign the box underneath using my fingertip electronically to "CONFIRM THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

If the non-refundable deposit bit was read out, then I agree with you, but from OP's account I don't think that was the case.  They signed to acknowledge all the terms they were given at that time, but not ones provided later.

Aylesbury_Duck

ctsoton said:

Undervalued said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

I think there may be a loophole here, because OP clearly didn't have the opportunity to read ALL the terms and conditions because they weren't known when they signed.  Whether the finance provider or ultimately a court would consider that sufficient to get OP's deposit back, I don't know.

I do have a little sympathy with the retailer here.  Placing an order and a deposit for a made-to-order piece of furniture when by OP's own admission they weren't completely certain they wanted it, is wasting the retailer's time and perhaps incurring some cost for the retailer.  However, the retailer's processes need tightening so they're not at risk of a potential challenge such as the one OP is considering.

Rather negated by the OP signing to say that they have!

From the OP.....

These were all read out and explained, he then asked me to sign the box underneath using my fingertip electronically to "CONFIRM THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Err no

Only page 1 was shown and explained.

Not sure how that was unclear. 


Page 2 was only printed off and given to me AFTER I had signed and the deposit and finance application had gone through


As for being uncertain. 

I was certain enough to go ahead.  If I had known that I had to be 100% certain at risk of losing my deposit I would have taken more time to decide

I also feel the intentional withholding of key information is unethical, their failure to get back to me about this isn't good enough. Hence why a month later even though I like the sofa and gave them sufficient time to investigate, apologise etc I've had enough and am escalating.

I would have been happy with

A) an apology 
an acknowledgement that it's not how they're trained and the sales guy was in the wrong


Instead all I've had is " can you edit your review please". When I said "I'm not editing it until we've resolved this" I've heard nothing since

But that's not your right in almost all other transactions of this type.  You're either certain or not, it's a binary thing.  While I think they've been incorrect with the way the terms were presented belatedly, they haven’t undermined any statutory right to a deposit refund because there isn't one, nor made a promise of a refundable deposit a later term undoes.