From: Conor on
On 17/04/2010 00:36, Rob Morley wrote:

> Except that in the case of the OP we're talking about goods not as
> described, so he's rejecting the goods under SOGA. All he has to do is
> make them available for collection by the buyer or his agent, business
> sellers will usually send a courier or supply pre-paid packaging. If he
> does the seller a favour by returning the goods on spec then the least
> he should expect is reimbursement for the actual cost of postage.
>
...although there is no legal requirement to do so and TBH, if I'd sent
something out that was perfectly OK and they just decided they didn't
want it, they can go screw themselves for the return postage as that's
likely to be 50% of the profit if they use any service the post office
supplies.

--
Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: Conor on
On 17/04/2010 01:41, MC wrote:
> Fran wrote:
>
>>
>> "Rob Morley"<nospam(a)ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:20100416133923.23fd37a0(a)bluemoon...
>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:48:41 +0100
>>> "Fran"<autumnacorn(a)vendredi.fr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fat lot of good that will do. Even if one files a SNAD return
>>>> postage isn't refunded.
>>>>
>>> How could eBay refund something that wasn't part of the original
>>> transaction? That still doesn't affect the buyer's rights under
>>> SOGA.
>>
>> Which do not include return postage.
>
> Yes they do.
>
Not under DSR.


--
Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: Peter Parry on
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:50:07 +0000 (UTC), "Dr Ivan D. Reid"
<Ivan.Reid(a)brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:26:51 +0100, Peter Parry <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk>
> wrote

>> That is the situation for goods returned under the Distance Selling
>> Regulations. If the goods are not in conformity with the contract
>> (not as described) then be it a private or business transaction they
>> can be rejected and the seller becomes liable for all costs. Rejection
>> makes the contract go away and the buyer must be left in the same
>> position as if they had not bought the goods so all of their expenses
>> must be refunded.
>
> I think you haven't got the essence of it. If you return
>something under the cooling-off period of the distance-selling regs you
>must be re-imbursed all your costs under the contract, including
>postage/carriage. *This does not include the cost of return
>postage/carriage!* I.e. as quoted above, "Consumers can be required to pay
>the cost of returning the goods."

There are two main reasons why goods would usually be returned and
they are governed by two separate pieces of legislation.

Firstly the Distance Selling Regulations (Statutory Instrument 2000
No. 2334). These apply only to consumer transactions (business to
consumer sales, not private sales). In such transactions the customer
may, for any or no reason, chose to return goods. The seller must
accept such a return. Subject to the seller meeting a quite large
number of provisions under the SI they may require the buyer to cover
the cost of returning the goods. The seller must refund the buyer all
the money they originally paid including the outward cost of postage.

> In other words, the _seller_ must be in the same position as before
>he sent the goods out -- no profit nor loss, and the goods in his hand.

The seller _always_ makes a loss on DSR returns as they must refund
the cost of posting the item to the buyer.

The second main reason for a return would be the goods are not in
conformity with the contract. This may include they are received
faulty or are not as described. The sellers liability differs between
consumer and private sales but in respect of goods not being as
described in the contract they are exactly the same - the buyer can
reject the goods. This rejection would be under S34 and 36 of the
Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended by Sale and Supply of Goods to
Consumers Regulations 2002).

If goods are rejected as not conforming to the contract then the
contract is rescinded. The seller must refund the buyer all the money
they have paid. The buyer is under no obligation to return the goods
(SoGA S36). If they do so the return costs must be paid by the
seller.


From: The Older Gentleman on
petrolcan <petrolcan(a)SPAMgmail.com> wrote:

> Still beating the same old drum then?

It's a racist. <Shrug> They don't ever seem to change.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: Rob Morley on
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:46:59 +0100
Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote:

> On 17/04/2010 00:36, Rob Morley wrote:
>
> > Except that in the case of the OP we're talking about goods not as
> > described, so he's rejecting the goods under SOGA. All he has to do
> > is make them available for collection by the buyer or his agent,
> > business sellers will usually send a courier or supply pre-paid
> > packaging. If he does the seller a favour by returning the goods on
> > spec then the least he should expect is reimbursement for the
> > actual cost of postage.
> >
> ..although there is no legal requirement to do so and TBH, if I'd
> sent something out that was perfectly OK and they just decided they
> didn't want it, they can go screw themselves for the return postage
> as that's likely to be 50% of the profit if they use any service the
> post office supplies.
>
At the risk of repeating myself - the seller is in breach of contract
because the goods are not as described. He must refund the buyer in
full. The buyer is under no obligation to return the rejected goods,
only to take reasonable care of them and make them available to the
seller or his agent. If the buyer /does/ return the goods to the
seller at the seller's request then he is entitled to receive
repayment of his costs.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Chinky in the clinky
Next: EBay Shill bidder prosecuted