Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

Hi :-) this is my first post so apologies in advance if I'm in the wrong place.

 

Last week I purchased two extra large cat carriers from online retailer Hoof and Hound Pet Supplies. They are extra large carriers and are in the manufacturers catalogue for cats and dogs ( same item number ) and are the largest offered.I paid for next day delivery and they arrived as expected, next day.

 

Immediately upon unpacking I felt the carriers seemed flimsy. The lid doesn't fit properly and overhangs the top on one side by over and inch, consequently leaving a gap of over an inch on the other side. Even worse, even under its own weight, when lifted, the lid comes away from the frame.

 

I put a 4.2kg bag of cat litter in the carrier to test it's strength ( 4.2kg is the weight on an average cat ) and lifted it and the lids completely distorts and bows, leaving a VERY large, gaping hole between lid and body. The gap is easily big enough for a cat to escape through.

 

So I emailed the retailer some pictures , including a picture of the weight load ( I have digital baby scales ) so that they could see that these carriers are unfit/poor quality/ faulty.

 

The retailer is happy to refund but absolutely insists that I pay the return postage. I have sent numerous extracts from the relevant parts of DSR which are just ignored. I am told that my carriers are NOT faulty and despite my repeated pleas, the retailer outright refuses to address why she thinks they are acceptable in light of the photographs. In fact, she has not once commented on the photographs and I have sent them about 7 times now.

 

Many emails have been exchanged and each time, the question of how can they say my carriers are fit for purpose is completely ignored. The emails are responded to so I know they have been received, but the relevant parts of my mail are not addressed at all.

 

I posted up on their Facebook page a complaint and they responded saying it was my fault as I have large breed cats ! I of course pointed out that a) I bought extra large carriers which itself implies for large cats , b) that they are also dog carriers and c) that the carriers won't hold an average weight cat ( averages moggies are between 4 and 5.5 kg )

 

I have phoned Citizens Advice who agree I am within my rights to request the retailer pays the return postage but beyond that, they seem unable to help :-(

 

I have even phoned the manufacturer of the carriers who of course can't make the retailer pay my return p&p . I had hoped that they could maybe liaise between us. I have also sent them the pictures of the carriers.

 

Now the return postage will cost around £8 ( I think as that's what I paid for inward ) so it's really not a lot of money but I'm just so SO upset by this. Part of me feels I should let it go but the more principled side of me says why should I ? Why on earth should I pay to return goods that are not fit for purpose ?

 

The last mail with regards to the carriers condition read ( and I quote ) " your carriers are NOT faulty ! "

 

I honestly expected the retailer to be shocked and horrified at the pictures and full of apologies , her behaviour and attitude has stunned me :-(

 

Can anyone advise as to how I can move forward with this please ? I'm so upset by how we have DSR and SaleofGoods acts etc but they are seemingly unenforceable :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

That should work fine as well. I'm guessing if Paypal refund you then that will be all your money back?

Once you have it back, just do the same thing, contact the retailer and tell them that the carriers are available for collection at their own expense. Either in the form of pre-paid packaging or a courier to come and collect at a time convenient to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That should work fine as well. I'm guessing if Paypal refund you then that will be all your money back?

Once you have it back, just do the same thing, contact the retailer and tell them that the carriers are available for collection at their own expense. Either in the form of pre-paid packaging or a courier to come and collect at a time convenient to you.

 

Hi :-) i'm pretty certain that paypal make you return the goods first and advise the seller only to refund upon return ........or is it the other way round , Paypal refund and THEN you return ? Pleeeeeeeeeeese say the latter :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, I'm not sure really, I don't use Paypal much for anything besides the odd eBay transaction and I've been fortunate enough to never have an issue like this crop up.

Reading a few of the other threads here though it seems that they tend to refund first, but that may only apply to eBay transactions and it's eBay doing the actual refunding.

 

Someone else might be a bit more knowledgeable regarding Paypal though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well thank you very much anyway :-) hopefully someone else will come along who will know. I've googled but cannot find anything specific re the order of refund/return.

 

The seller still hasn't responded to my claim anyway, no surprise, I suspect she plans to wait until the last day possible !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...