Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Re: SoGA Truths, Myths & Lies
K
I posted this in the thread you mentioned
The law is what matters NOT what the OFT suggest, desire to be the case or think. The OFT do not make the law in this land we call the UK, the Government does through acts of Parliament.
In fairness to the OFT, if they were to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, they would have to admit that they don’t have the power to intercede that they think they have.
Without the power, they would have to justify their existence and funding somewhat more than they do and consumers would lose confidence in them as a body.
They are to some extent no more a threat or champion as are Which to be frank. IMHO they should stick to doing what there original mandate was, the Consumer Credit Act, Consumer Credit Licences and similar veins.
The SoGA is a strange old thing. Old being the operative word in that sentence. It dates back to 1979 would you believe, back in the days of the local shop, knowing. the local people, selling locally manufactured items at prices unaffected by the likes of bulk buying sheds we now have.
Unfortunately, rather than right some law to suit the modern world, we have basically hacked into what was suitable, but is no longer fit for purpose and made it a whole mess of rubbish.
There are so many contradictions in it because we have knee jerked reacted to something somewhere in the world that none of it really makes sense to anyone.
As with all law, some of it is good and some of it is an ass but almost always it comes down to interpreting what WAS intended for it to be not what it is written as.
The OFT fail to mention in all their blurb on this how easy it is to get out of things and how they make the song and dance in their advertising and statements just how difficult it is to enforce and if you cannot enforce something then I ask why bother.
Someone on the other thread mentioned the 6 month rule. This is not law! There is actually no provision within the SoGA which defines this and I will give you an example why.
I made the comment about Duracell (other brands are available). As a hobby, I build and fly model aeroplanes and cars. I go through shed loads of batteries in both the aeroplane itself and the remote transmitters.
Some batteries last longer than others but none last six months from the time I insert them.
Batteries are not considered perishable in law as they have a shelf life. I am looking at a set now which tell me they are good until Sept 2014. Having gone through a complete set of batteries in about three hours of constant play, I find it expensive.
Using the supposed 6 month rule, would any reasonable person believe I could have a genuine realistic chance of a successful claim for the batteries not being fit for purpose and it be assumed that Tesco (other stores are available) would reimburse me in full within six months as they had to prove they WERE fit for purpose during that whole six month period. Of course not and so the law does’t provide for it.
The only way the law could deal with this is to have something as big as the entire Encyclopaedia Britannia (other Encyclopaedia are available) which just plain and simply isn’t going to happen.
People mention constantly fit for purpose. What isn’t fit for purpose is the SoGA.
Jackal
Re: Commercial Or Domestic Use?
Exactly
The manufacturers warranty is IN ADDITION to the the consumers statutory rights, NOT instead of them.
Any warranty is always the responsibility of the trader whom has taken the money from the Buyer.
If the manufacturer chooses to revoke a warranty on a product that is their prerogative and the instance you describe is a very valid reason for any manufacturer. The customers rights to remedy remain with the seller whom took their money, with the exception of one instance and this is if the unit is over £100 and it was bought via a Hire Purchase agreement in which case it is the responsibility of the Hire Purchase Finance Company.
Jackal
Re: What is
K
I am not frustrated at all but I dislike people coming on spouting rubbish they have cut and pasted from a source which is not definitive.
The law is what matters NOT what the OFT suggest, desire to be the case or think. The OFT do not make the law in this land we call the UK, the Government does through acts of Parliament.
If the OFT were the all signing all dancing all authoritative body they think they are, tell me why did they so spectacularly screw up the banking charge fiasco some months ago?
I will tell you why, they think they have power they don’t actually have and are not the body that actually has to prove in a Court of Law that the Law has actually been broken.
I refer you back to the SoG Act 1979 which together with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 which are the sole authorities on this subject. The SoG Act 1979 has so many holes in it we, whose day job is to deal with such matters, refer to it as the Colander Law.
Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, Section II, Part 14, Sub Section 2A states, and I quote from Hansards
“(2A) For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances”
So if we take into account the description that the goods are NOT new and are in fact Reconditioned, that the price is significantly lower than the brand new equivalent and importantly the other relevant circumstance notified BEFORE the transactional decision is made, i.ee that it only has a 1 month warranty is notified to the Buyer BEFORE the contract is made, then the seller has COMPLIED with the SoG Act in full and there is Jack Manure the OFT, Trading Standards or anyone else can do about it.
Now for case law: Chester Trading Standards v HS (2012). HS successfully argued that having made the Buyer aware in writing prior to the transactional decision being made of the specific limitation of their guarantee on the product they were in compliance with the Sale of Goods Act 1979, more over by providing written details of the sale contract and their warranty prior to the purchase any offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulation 2008 became invalid.
What cannot happen of course is the sale take place THEN the T&C’s come into force. The Buyer must be aware of them first. Equally, if the buyer says the purchase is intended for a specific purpose PRIOR to the sale and the sale then continues, the Seller cannot then get out of any warranty offered at the time of the purchase. So if I go into Argos and say to the sales person I am in need of a fridge for my restaurant and they sell it me without removing the warranty, then it is guaranteed just like one used for a domestic purpose because they knew the purpose it was to be used for. They cannot come back and say we don’t guarantee items used for commercial use etc.
Jackal
Re: What is “reconditioned” washing machine?
My 2 years as lead council for a Trading Standards office was clearly a waste of time and I bow to your superior cut and paste skills. I will stick to the acts of parliament called Law.
So armed with your last definitive post on the subject, I am off to argue the six year rule with Duracell where I will cite you as the definitive source on the subject, which will obviously scare them into submission and as a thank you I will donate 50{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} of the refund to this site.
Jokers the lot if you.
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: What is “reconditioned” washing machine?
Statfordgirl
That is incorrect if the sellers terms are notified to the buyer BEFORE the date/time the transactional decision is made.
You would be correct however, if the seller came to rely on T&C’s AFTER the buyer committed to purchase if the buyer were unaware of something within the terms and conditions, which at the time of the purchase, would have affected their decision to purchase.
Within the law this is something called the TRANSACTIONAL DATE. This is used specifically in Consumer Protection Law to determine when a contract comes into place and therefore what is unfair and what is not regarding T&C’s.
However none of this is material to the OP’s original question. Please keep this thread on track, if anyone wishes to engage on the rights and wrongs of UK law then please start a suitable thread in the Legal forum.
Best Regards
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: What is “reconditioned” washing machine?
Martin wrote:
The definition of the word ‘reconditioned’ means ‘ to restore to a good working condition’but that is YOUR definition, it is not a legal one as no definition exists within the industry, thus the quality of the goods offered WILL always differ from one seller to another.
The term reconditioned can mean a multitude of things ranging from a bag of manure to a fully graded appliance and all unsundry in between and hence my original post on this thread.
Caveat Emptor and all that!
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: What is “reconditioned” washing machine?
The spelling, one us spelt R E C O N the other us spelt …….
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Hoover help
Bob
PM me your email addy and I will forward it to you or you can borrow my login to obtain it yourself.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Flame Failure Device
And you are a sad pathetic excuse of a person hell bent on causing trouble because you could not get us to agree to help you do something dangerous and illegal.
Talk to the site owner he is Kwatt about having my position as a moderator reassessed and i will live with his decision. He has posted on this thread a couple of times, see if he agrees with you and we can take it from there. He can be contacted via a PM on this site or don’t you have the necessary tools (testicles) to do it, which I suspect to be the case.
For the avoidance of any doubt, I am not going to go away on this thread.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Flame Failure Device
and we are back where we started.
I got to be a moderator because the owners recognise I have skills they need to help keep this site in order and running legally.
But I don’t need to explain myself or my position to someone as stupid, argumentative and as unimportant as you.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Server Outage
Hopefully not, I am enjoying one of them!
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Flame Failure Device
So having been given the opportunity to walk away you choose to go on and on and on like the proverbial broken record, it sums you up really.
I bet your sitting there in the dark at your computer with just your pants on, dreaming you had met your idol Sir Jimmy before he died, as now you could have someone to blame for your miserable, pathetic excuse for an existence.
Careful now, don’t get too excited…..you will ruin another keyboard.
I can keep this up forever, and I have only just begun. I look forward to you next post as always.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Watchdoggin
Dog with a bone and all that….
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Flame Failure Device
Now we are getting somewhere and your starting to smell the coffee at long last.
If you want to leave it here then I suggest you decline to post further on this particular thread if not then we can continue as we are, my preference would be the former but it is your thread and your decision.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.ukRe: Watchdoggin
I will sky plus it as dealing with the idiot regarding his FFD bypass and it looks like its going to be a long night.
Jackal
Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk
http://www.lofra-uk.co.uk
