From: Sid on

"Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4tnkjqF14nl9cU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> "Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
> news:d16dn2lglm3is2mgbvevj027gdk2efnssh(a)4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:56:04 -0000, "Alison Hopkins"
>> <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote
>>>Hang on. (And again, not a dig at PP, who I respect greatly. Or Sid.) If
>>>Sid
>>>thinks his wife dropped a bollock, and wasn't mislead, how can it be
>>>right,
>>>moral or ethical to take this to court?
>>
>> As I read it his wife bought a skirt of the size she thought would
>> fit. On receipt the size shown on the garment was the size she
>> ordered and thought would fit as it was the same size she usually
>> wears but when she tried it it didn't fit. I don't think this is
>> unusual in clothing where reality and the label often differ quite a
>> lot.
>>
>> No one other than the manufacturer has made a mistake, the buyer
>> ordered the right size, the seller sent what they thought was the
>> right size.
>>
>> In such a case the DSR's give the buyer the advantage as they can
>> return the goods.
>
> I'd be interested to know if the original listing gave actual
> measurements, as well as size. As a matter of course, if the brand is
> unfamiliar, I ask for measurements.

yes it did give both measurements.
Sid


From: bcc97 on

Sid wrote:
> I do, but i think it unwise and not useful to publish it here.
> actually on inspection, a refund is offered "if the item is misrepresented,
> but less postage costs" (I'm assuming he means postage both ways).
> Sid

Setting aside DSR, this statement is clearly illegal as it restricts
the consumer's rights in respect of misrepresented or misdescribed
goods. The statement is void under the Unfair Contract Terms Act as
well as the unfair terms regulations, and it is also a criminal offence
to make statements like this (just like a 'no refunds' notice in a
shop).

From: Sid on

"bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in message
news:1165404601.808432.195700(a)n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Sid wrote:
>> I do, but i think it unwise and not useful to publish it here.
>> actually on inspection, a refund is offered "if the item is
>> misrepresented,
>> but less postage costs" (I'm assuming he means postage both ways).
>> Sid
>
> Setting aside DSR, this statement is clearly illegal as it restricts
> the consumer's rights in respect of misrepresented or misdescribed
> goods. The statement is void under the Unfair Contract Terms Act as
> well as the unfair terms regulations, and it is also a criminal offence
> to make statements like this (just like a 'no refunds' notice in a
> shop).

sadly it is endemic in ebay sellers that most use "not responsible for this
and that...", i think ebay/uk should definitely take another look at this
and force sellers to wake up to their responsibilties. it would make ebay a
happy place all round.

I think this has been answered in the thread before, but i can't find it
now - does the buyer have to explicitely mention the DSR to exercise his
rights under the DSR?
if a buyer just states "i don't want this anymore", is that enough? I'm just
thinking about where a mutual or a NPB would be appropriate from a sellers
perspective.

thanks bcc97, appreciate it.
Sid


From: Sid on

"Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
news:d16dn2lglm3is2mgbvevj027gdk2efnssh(a)4ax.com...
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:56:04 -0000, "Alison Hopkins"
> <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"Peter Parry" <peter(a)wpp.ltd.uk> wrote
>>Hang on. (And again, not a dig at PP, who I respect greatly. Or Sid.) If
>>Sid
>>thinks his wife dropped a bollock, and wasn't mislead, how can it be
>>right,
>>moral or ethical to take this to court?

> As I read it his wife bought a skirt of the size she thought would
> fit. On receipt the size shown on the garment was the size she
> ordered and thought would fit as it was the same size she usually
> wears but when she tried it it didn't fit. I don't think this is
> unusual in clothing where reality and the label often differ quite a
> lot.
>
> No one other than the manufacturer has made a mistake, the buyer
> ordered the right size, the seller sent what they thought was the
> right size.

this is exactly the case, all the clothing that she has is the same dress
size and fit her perfectly, this one bought last week is also the same dress
size but doesn't fit.
my advice to her has always been 'don't buy clothes online', now if the
seller abides by the DSR, i would have no problem in reversing that advice,
and in doing so, chances are the seller will see more profit. everyones a
winner.
Sid


From: Niel Humphreys on
"nick" <pizzalovingcriminal(a)allstar.gg> wrote in message
news:4576a12b$0$31227$da0feed9(a)news.zen.co.uk...
>
> "bcc97" <bcc98(a)stork.plus.com> wrote in
>
>>> Well you could just forget about it and either give it to charity or
>>> sell it
>>> on ebay,
>>
>> This does future prospective buyers a disservice. If it's the wrong
>> size, ask the seller if they'll exchange it. If they won't, cancel the
>> contract. If the seller then won't refund, leave negative feedback to
>> warn others. This needn't take a lot of time or effort.
>>
>> You could also, ultimately, sue for a refund. This will take a little
>> more time and effort, and only you can decide whether it's worthwhile
>> to you.
>>
>> You could also report the seller to Trading Standards, again to protect
>> future buyers.
>
> >
>Or you could just be normal and move on...

Lol, that's about the sum of it.

Niel H