What ever happened to the ICE Fitter?

grayme-m

mdbarber wrote: »

that I send back the "evidence"!!, omg get real dudes!

Erm, isn't that the whole point of all this, you send back the broken radio and they send you back your money?

Just what exactly do you want?

Currently you have a broken stereo and they have your money; it seems they are happy to keep things that way if you are.

Do you think it is fair for them to send you the money first?

deanos

Just when i thought it couldnt get more weird :rotfl:

mdbarber

grayme-m wrote: »

Erm, isn't that the whole point of all this, you send back the broken radio and they send you back your money?
Just what exactly do you want?
Currently you have a broken stereo and they have your money; it seems they are happy to keep things that way if you are.
Do you think it is fair for them to send you the money first?

Just exactly what I want?, no I think the statement of case was that I want my money back. my interpretation of the law says I am entitled to it.

Before the trolls jump in. As it is the only charge on the statement of case it is already established that my interpretation is not downright wrong otherwise as you pointed out the judge could have just thrown it out.
Also DAP Cambridge/incarexpress have not shown me anything to disprove it, despite having six months to do so.

I have spent 6 months without my money and no working stereo, does that seem fair? So I send off the stereo and they have both my money and my evidence, does that seem fair?, Thinking maybe "fair" is slightly subjective!
Obviously a few think it is fair, but I don't(does that make me a bad person?) and as you pointed out it is my money technically so to hold on to it is unfair!! and I'm convinced if they continue to do so, there will be a judgment on my behalf follwed by the usual certificate

c'mon the statement of case lists a faulty car stereo, surely it would indeed seem odd that I have no evidence of my case at a hearing if they don't actually pay me.

They have told me in previous correspondence that they will be awarded damages if I lose, so why are they whingeing about the cost of attending a hearing? if they are right I will be paying it. What's the problem?

cavycrazy_2

I see your dilemma. Wouldn't it be good if Royal Mail did some kind of tracking service whereby you could send a parcel and the folks at the other end had to sign for it, thereby proving what you sent?

grayme-m

mdbarber wrote: »

Just exactly what I want?, no I think the statement of case was that I want my money back. my interpretation of the law says I am entitled to it.

Before the trolls jump in. As it is the only charge on the statement of case it is already established that my interpretation is not downright wrong otherwise as you pointed out the judge could have just thrown it out.
Also DAP Cambridge/incarexpress have not shown me anything to disprove it, despite having six months to do so.

I have spent 6 months without my money and no working stereo, does that seem fair? So I send off the stereo and they have both my money and my evidence, does that seem fair?, Thinking maybe "fair" is slightly subjective!
Obviously a few think it is fair, but I don't(does that make me a bad person?) and as you pointed out it is my money technically so to hold on to it is unfair!! and I'm convinced if they continue to do so, there will be a judgment on my behalf follwed by the usual certificate

c'mon the statement of case lists a faulty car stereo, surely it would indeed seem odd that I have no evidence of my case at a hearing if they don't actually pay me.

They have told me in previous correspondence that they will be awarded damages if I lose, so why are they whingeing about the cost of attending a hearing? if they are right I will be paying it. What's the problem?

I don't recall anyone writing that you shouldn't get your money back; but it does seem to be everyone's (but yours) view that you should send the item back first. Otherwise you'd rather they sent you the money first? In actual fact you seem to suggest you want to keep tge stereo?If you sent it back and they kept your money, you could claim back off the credit card co (not sure if you could now given the timescale). Otherwise, they send you your money and how can they be sure you won't just keep the item?The judge didn't throw out my case, but the claimant still lost; in fact in my experience of four cases, only once did the judge decide anything without a hearing.It will be interesting to find out what the judge considers 'fair'.

Bamber19

mdbarber wrote: »

c'mon the statement of case lists a faulty car stereo, surely it would indeed seem odd that I have no evidence of my case at a hearing if they don't actually pay me.

Just out of interest, are you planning on taking the stereo along and presenting it as evidence that it actually is faulty?

I don't really see the issue, if the court awards in your favour and they don't pay you wouldn't be going back to court to prove again that the item was faulty, simply to enforce payment.

You must see that it seems silly to not get something sorted easily on the off chance that you may need it as evidence in court (again what exactly you're going to show as such evidence is beyond me, it's unlikely the judge when take the stereo outside and fit it to his own car to check it) No-one would ever return faulty items if everyone had potential future litigation in mind (the irony being that such litigation would be avoided if you just returned the item, regardless of whether you believe you have to or not)

Please address the three things i mentioned.

Sssssss

so mdbarber tell me abit more about your case

mdbarber

Bamber19 wrote: »

Just out of interest, are you planning on taking the stereo along and presenting it as evidence that it actually is faulty?

I don't really see the issue, if the court awards in your favour and they don't pay you wouldn't be going back to court to prove again that the item was faulty, simply to enforce payment.

You must see that it seems silly to not get something sorted easily on the off chance that you may need it as evidence in court (again what exactly you're going to show as such evidence is beyond me, it's unlikely the judge when take the stereo outside and fit it to his own car to check it) No-one would ever return faulty items if everyone had potential future litigation in mind (the irony being that such litigation would be avoided if you just returned the item, regardless of whether you believe you have to or not)

Please address the three things i mentioned.

1. well as they haven't actually outright denied its faulty and they were the ones telling me to use the faulty goods return procedure? it seems a bit odd they haven't refunded.
2.They impression I got right from the start is incarexpress have absolutely no interest in my best interests, so can I trust them to test it fairly ?
3As stated before I have an exact same model working in my car so to actually demonstrate the fault if I take both to court would take less than a few minutes. and any experienced electronic engineer will know the fault cannot be caused by incorrect fitting.(let alone prove it was).
All in all, I have a massive amount of reason to distrust anything DAP Cambidge incarexpress state so would take a major act of faith in me to change that position
As it stands my first act of faith in incarexpress (giving them my money)has never been reciprocated, so in the interest of justice maybe it's time they performed one?

the statement about getting something sorted easily may have applied 6 months ago, as everything else it's become subjective.

Sssssss

to save me having to go through so many posts, tell me what exactly is the fault and which model did you buy?

grayme-m

mdbarber wrote: »

1. well as they haven't actually outright denied its faulty and they were the ones telling me to use the faulty goods return procedure? it seems a bit odd they haven't refunded.
2.They impression I got right from the start is incarexpress have absolutely no interest in my best interests, so can I trust them to test it fairly ?
3As stated before I have an exact same model working in my car so to actually demonstrate the fault if I take both to court would take less than a few minutes. and any experienced electronic engineer will know the fault cannot be caused by incorrect fitting.(let alone prove it was).
All in all, I have a massive amount of reason to distrust anything DAP Cambidge incarexpress state so would take a major act of faith in me to change that position
As it stands my first act of faith in incarexpress (giving them my money)has never been reciprocated, so in the interest of justice maybe it's time they performed one?

the statement about getting something sorted easily may have applied 6 months ago, as everything else it's become subjective.

Is it just me, or do your arguments just keep going around in circles?

You believe it is faulty, otherwise you wouldn't want a swap (now refund), what is your problem with them wanting it returned under the faulty goods return procedure?

ICE don't know until they see the item so want to see it to find out it is faulty, how can they be sure anything is faulty until they see it?

So you want them to just refund you when as the consumer, you hold all the legal aces (e.g. SOGA, etc.) and then trust you to send it back to them afterwards?