We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Sale of goods act

corporate-eye
Posts: 6 Forumite
Help!
Not sure if this is the right place to make this post, if it's not, apologies.
Purchased a very expensive Full Circle coat (£240) at Xmas 2007. When I got it, it appeared to be in good nick.
Since then I've worn it for three months and, quite frankly, it's now knackered. The inside lining seams are coming loose in two places and have come apart in another. Two holes have developed in the lining too, just above the inside pocket.
I took the item back to the shop where I got it and asked for a refund - they refused and said they would only repair it - no refund, no exchange.
I refused on the basis that it would have been "patched" rather than relined, so it wouldn't have been "as new".
Would people agree that, given that I didn't abuse the coat and only wore it to work at back, a) the coat should have laster longer than three months and b) I should be entitled to a refund or exchange and not, as was offered, a repair.
Any ideas very welcome- would like to go small claims court route.
Nick
Not sure if this is the right place to make this post, if it's not, apologies.
Purchased a very expensive Full Circle coat (£240) at Xmas 2007. When I got it, it appeared to be in good nick.
Since then I've worn it for three months and, quite frankly, it's now knackered. The inside lining seams are coming loose in two places and have come apart in another. Two holes have developed in the lining too, just above the inside pocket.
I took the item back to the shop where I got it and asked for a refund - they refused and said they would only repair it - no refund, no exchange.
I refused on the basis that it would have been "patched" rather than relined, so it wouldn't have been "as new".
Would people agree that, given that I didn't abuse the coat and only wore it to work at back, a) the coat should have laster longer than three months and b) I should be entitled to a refund or exchange and not, as was offered, a repair.
Any ideas very welcome- would like to go small claims court route.
Nick
0
Comments
-
http://www.netlawman.co.uk/acts/sale-of-goods-act-1979.php
Sale of Goods Act there.
I'm pretty sure that they can offer a repair instead of a replacement x0 -
Yes...........You are covered by the Sale of Goods Act
Yes.............. under this law, you are entitled in this instance to a repair
No...............Under this law, you are not entitled to a refund.
The company has offered to repair the coat. Go for it!!! They are fulfilling their obligations by law. You are actually going to harm your own case if you refuse the repair (and there are further problems).
You wouldn't stand a chance in Small Claims at this stage (the company have offered what they need to by law..........and you refused).How many surrealists does it take to change a lightbulb?
...
...
...
...
Fish0 -
My thoughts are take the repair.I don't know this brand,but just because you paid a lot,doesn't meanit is going to be good quality,and you have had quite bit of wear,however,I could be wrong.0
-
You've had 3 months wear of it - would you expect something 3 months old to be 'as new', nope so their repair doesn't have to make it as new and it is up to the retailer which option of repair, replace or refund they take.
I do wish before spouting about their rights people actually got them right.0 -
Have you had it cleaned in that time?0
-
I only read this thread because I saw "Sale Of Goods Act" in the title and bet the person posting wouldn't have been right.
Guess what................................0 -
I only read this thread because I saw "Sale Of Goods Act" in the title and bet the person posting wouldn't have been right.
Guess what................................
The OP was seeking the opinions and advice of others. These are the bits you may have (deliberately) missed:corporate-eye wrote: »Would people agreecorporate-eye wrote: »Any ideas very welcome0 -
Erm Phil,
But did you also (delibrately) miss this bit.corporate-eye wrote: »would like to go small claims court route.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards