From: Joe Lee on

"Niel Humphreys" <admin(a)sznzozwzdzoznzczozmzpzuztzezrzs.co.uk> wrote in
message news:w62dnUfD9K-M6OnYnZ2dnUVZ8tidnZ2d(a)pipex.net...
> "Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
> news:uls8n29ueuojmioo59j1lotjc0beelfv56(a)4ax.com...
>> On 4 Dec 2006 09:06:40 -0800, "bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But if the seller doesn't in fact have such a term, then how else would
>>>use of a NPB strike be 'illegal'?
>>
>> For a start it would be a false claim. The effect of canceling under
>> the DSR's is to eliminate the contract. There can be no NPB as there
>> would be no contract requiring payment. Secondly to use it could be
>> seen as a threat to discourage people from using their rights in law.
>
>
> With respect how could it be false

> Non Paying Bidder = The OP placed a bid (bidder) and hasn't paid (non
> paying). What's false about that? :)


the buyer has cancelled the Contract (as he is entitled to do),

So now there is no Contract'

No Contract = no buyer.

No buyer/bidder means there is no one to issue a NPB strike against.

Joe Lee








> Niel H


From: Raj on

"Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4tjbp9F14g1nmU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> "The Older Gentleman" <chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
> message
> news:1hpu4gk.1ohf386siayydN%chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com...
>> Alison Hopkins <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Are you *really* trusting Usenet for expert advice? Honestly?
>>
>>
>> <VVBG>
>>
>
> I don't know what they teach them in schools these days. <grin>
>
> Ali
>

Do something wrong and then blame others!!!!!

Raj Kundra
Kundra Computers


From: Alison Hopkins on

"Marcus Redd" <read(a)it.com> wrote in message
news:45748678$0$5472$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
> "The Older Gentleman" <chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
> message
> news:1hpu4fa.1yfstuu18hxpxdN%chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com...
>> Marcus Redd <read(a)it.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You don't have to read my posts.
>>
>> Good.
>
> Another one for the kf eh? In you go...
>

Keep going. With any luck, you'll dump yourself in there, and we'll be
spared this tedious drivel.

Ali


From: Alison Hopkins on

"Raj" <raj@(remove.)kundracomputers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:VH0dh.58318$qd7.41265(a)fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
> news:4tjbp9F14g1nmU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "The Older Gentleman" <chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:1hpu4gk.1ohf386siayydN%chateau.murraySPAMKILL(a)dsl.pipex.com...
>>> Alison Hopkins <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you *really* trusting Usenet for expert advice? Honestly?
>>>
>>>
>>> <VVBG>
>>>
>>
>> I don't know what they teach them in schools these days. <grin>
>>
>> Ali
>>
>
> Do something wrong and then blame others!!!!!
>

You speak truth, mate.

Ali


From: Peter Parry on
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 19:20:47 -0000, "Niel Humphreys"
<admin(a)sznzozwzdzoznzczozmzpzuztzezrzs.co.uk> wrote:

>"Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
>news:uls8n29ueuojmioo59j1lotjc0beelfv56(a)4ax.com...
>> On 4 Dec 2006 09:06:40 -0800, "bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But if the seller doesn't in fact have such a term, then how else would
>>>use of a NPB strike be 'illegal'?
>>
>> For a start it would be a false claim. The effect of canceling under
>> the DSR's is to eliminate the contract. There can be no NPB as there
>> would be no contract requiring payment. Secondly to use it could be
>> seen as a threat to discourage people from using their rights in law.
>
>
>With respect how could it be false

As Joe has said, the effect of the DSR's is to eliminate the
contract.

"10. (2) Except as otherwise provided by these Regulations, the
effect of a notice of cancellation is that the contract shall be
treated as if it had not been made."

If the contract has not been made the buyer cannot be a non payer -
there is nothing to pay.

>Non Paying Bidder = The OP placed a bid (bidder) and hasn't paid (non
>paying). What's false about that? :)

Nothing, until you add in the above. The seller offered goods, the
buyer agreed to buy them, and may have done so. They then changed
their mind as they are entitled to by the DSR's.

That eliminates the contract to buy. The seller has to refund the
buyer all their money, the buyer has to restore the goods to the
seller. Not only does no contract now exist but according to the
DSR's it shall be as if no contract _ever_ existed. If no contract
ever existed then there cannot have been a non paying bidder.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/