I expect they'll ignore it. Don't assume they'll act with any integrity, as most traders would; the whole credit not has been carefully designed to trap the unwary customer. You'll have to sue or abandon your money.
The simple fact is that you were unaware of the expiry date since they had not advised you of the T&Cs in tiny print on their credit not. They're trying to impose additional, unfair terms on a done deal.
It got nowhere .. reply form them that their policy is a time limited Credit Note, which cannot be re-issued and "was signed by me" at time of issue"
So they have my money & goods .... SO BE WARNED ABOUT MACHINE MART
The trouble is, he has lost his evidence.
In message , Rick Hughes writes
I will indeed drop in to the new branch when I am next passing. Is 'Rick Hughes' the name for you that they have?
Something makes me think they won't be around for long
Well, that's them struck off my suppliers list. Fuck them right between the eyes.
I've never had any problems with Machine Mart. Quite knowledgeable and helpful staff in my local store.
It is ... doubt any branch would know me though :-)
You didn't mention that you'd signed something. It is still an unfair contract term which they've managed to impose by stealth. They did not inform you of the T&Cs before you agreed to accept the credit not and they are not allowed to impose penalties for a breach of the T&Cs, they are not a court.
I'd still sue them, but then I'd have taken note of what I was signing and I would not have accepted a credit not in exchange for defective goods in the first instance.
Replying to the older thread as this is where you mentioned the original circumstances. Just looking at the SOGA on Trading Standards website and saw this:
"Customers do have a legal right to a refund, repair or replacement if an item they purchased
- does not match the description
- is not of satisfactory quality
- is not fit for purpose ."
"You cannot remove a customer's legal rights, for example by displaying a notice saying 'we do not give refunds under any circumstances' or 'credit notes only in the case of faulty items'.
It is also against the law to mislead consumers about their legal rights - this could lead to a criminal prosecution under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008."
I think someone mentioned that you'd effectively played into their hands by accepting the credit note, and on the basis that "ignorance of the law is no excuse" that might seem true.
But since they used the "opened the box" excuse to refuse a refund, aren't they liable to criminal prosecution?
Well done that man. One would have thought the small claims court would be aware of SOGA.....
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 20:43 stuart noble wrote in uk.d-i-y:
Perhaps the defence (ie the OP) would have had to present that argument explicitly? Not ideal I know, but I wonder how the court operates.
I tried that, but Machine Mart head office said they issued Credit Note as I no longer wanted the item. Whereas I took it back as unfit for purpose ....
Unfortunately no proof, the judge ruled that as I had accepted the Credit Note, then that was the end of my rights to a refund.
He did clearly say that if I had pushed issue at time and insisted on refund they by Law should have provide such.
There is no 'duty of care' on Machine mart to inform me of my rights.
I asked about description not matching item, again he would not change - the fact I accepted the Credit Note, meant I accepted all the t&c's that go with them, irrespective of whether I read then or not.
I'm surprised that the legislation on unfair terms & conditions (which is what I would have expected a very small expiry date that no-one points out to you would be) were not applicable.
And to me that would suggest that whether you 'accepted' them or not is immaterial.
Judge said immaterial ... I asked if MM had a duty of care to explain any time limit - Judge said no as they were printed T&C's
Judge held that while he was disappointed in the position MM had taken, and they should have offered the refund initially, as I had accepted the Credit note, legally had accepted t&c's that go with them.
That's odd, because it's normal for unfair T&Cs to be in print.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.