What ever happened to the ICE Fitter?

mdbarber

cavycrazy wrote: »

And then if you had continued to read the thread after I pointed out to you in subsequent posts of mine, ICE'S t/cs instead of just arguing you would have seen that ICE's t/cs specifically state that the buyer is repsonsible for initial return postage costs, to be refunded if and when purchase is deemed to be faulty and not broken by idiot.

Do you have a date yet?

Oh I read every word
When I originally contacted incarexpress their T&C's did not state buyer was responsible for return postage of goods rejected under SOGA, has this changed now?
nope no date as yet, got to wait till 28 days after order was made to make application to court for another date.
Also still waiting to hear where the right for defendant to examine goods comes from though?

cavycrazy_2

You didn't reject it under the bloody SOGA no matter how many times you say you did! You fitted it and it worked and it then blew up. Just stop trying to have them over and admit you're wrong! Pay the bloody return postage and stop being such a pedantic twit. If it's faulty as you claim and you didn't knacker it, then you'll get your postage back.

dmg24

mdbarber wrote: »

lol but the thread was up to a couple of hundred hits a day, some peeps are interested!

The only reason people are interested is because your posts make for such hilarious reading!

mdbarber

cavycrazy wrote: »

You didn't reject it under the bloody SOGA no matter how many times you say you did! You fitted it and it worked and it then blew up. Just stop trying to have them over and admit you're wrong! Pay the bloody return postage and stop being such a pedantic twit. If it's faulty as you claim and you didn't knacker it, then you'll get your postage back.

lol indeed i did reject it under the soga as i was instructed to do so by trading standards and until you can disprove this or give good reason (other than mere opinion) that i didn't! you can pay the postage and stop being such a pedantic twit

Sssssss

mdbarber wrote: »

lol but the thread was up to a couple of hundred hits a day, some peeps are interested!

over 50% generated by you, now :shhh: ...

mdbarber

Sssssss wrote: »

over 50% generated by you, now :shhh: ...

doesn't look like it, i came and went a couple of times and no change, guess its based on unique ip's which is good more accurate and hey this thread has reached 184 in less than 18hrs

cavycrazy_2

mdbarber wrote: »

lol indeed i did reject it under the soga as i was instructed to do so by trading standards and until you can disprove this or give good reason (other than mere opinion) that i didn't! you can pay the postage and stop being such a pedantic twit

Newsflash - Trading Standards are not infallible.

As for me paying the postage, I would have done. Actually, I wouldn't have ordered from them in the first place, being as I, you know, read terms and conditions and check out sites before handing over my card details.

cavycrazy_2

mdbarber wrote: »

doesn't look like it, i came and went a couple of times and no change, guess its based on unique ip's which is good more accurate and hey this thread has reached 184 in less than 18hrs

The only thing more popular than a flame war is a comedy thread.

This subject is comedy gold.

mdbarber

cavycrazy wrote: »

The only thing more popular than a flame war is a comedy thread.

This subject is comedy gold.

I agree but only because of the same repetitive non sense being handed out,
Time and time again you have been proved wrong on both your posting of said SOGA and interpretation of it, LET LOOK AT THE FACTS!

1. I did indeed reject goods under soga
2. incarexpress have failed to refund me my money
3. incarexpress continue to offer less than my legal rights.
These believe it or not are undisputed, undeniable FACTS and whilst I state these perhaps over aggressively, that does not change what they are.
Any other relevant facts?, because I for one would welcome them

nellytheelephant

I never really understood what happened here (too many pages!!), was the radio ever returned? x