Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Faulty Temp Sensor cost me €1,500 Approx

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    maidhc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,660 ✭✭✭maidhc


    Larry David wrote:
    Haigh Maidhc,

    I don't believe that story.

    Apologies, it was actually an Irish supreme court case, I thought it was a UK one!:
    Conole v Redbank Oyster Company [1976] I.R. 191.


  • Options
    #33
    Larry David
    Closed Accounts Posts: 205 ✭✭Larry David


    ah yes - a one-off case from 1976. So relevent to today! I guess you rest your case now?


  • Options
    #34
    maidhc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,660 ✭✭✭maidhc


    Larry David wrote:
    ah yes - a one-off case form 1976. So relevent to today! I guess you rest your case now?

    ..it is the supreme court..

    It was just an example.There are plenty more there...


  • Options
    #35
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,627 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Larry David wrote:
    You sure about that? Maybe you can explain the ridiculous warnings and disclaimers on most household products then? e.g "Do not drink this Bleach".
    you can't put bitter flavours or warning colours in beach !


  • Options
    #36
    TempestSabre
    Registered Users Posts: 4,142 ✭✭✭TempestSabre


    Larry David wrote:
    ah yes - a one-off case from 1976. So relevent to today! I guess you rest your case now?

    Do they go out of date or something?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    gyppo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,648 ✭✭✭gyppo


    I've been following this thread from the start, and while I do have sympathy for the OP, in fairness he should have acted sooner when he realised there was a problem with the car.

    The OP must have had some reasonable expectation of what the fuel consumption of this car was likely to be. I would be suprised if any buyer of a new (or used) car did not inform themselves as to its likely running costs.
    The point is that the excessive mpg should have been fairly obvious, and should have warranted the car being brought back to the vendor at the first oppertunity.

    The OP said
    "I just assumed that I had purchased an extremely inefficent car"

    Why did'nt he bring it back as soon as he could? I realise he had other issues going on in his life at the time, but surely he should have made it his business to inform the seller of the problem sooner.


  • Options
    #38
    Larry David
    Closed Accounts Posts: 205 ✭✭Larry David


    TempestSabre wrote:
    Do they go out of date or something?
    Yeah - it's called changing times & consumer laws.


  • Options
    #39
    maidhc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,660 ✭✭✭maidhc


    Larry David wrote:
    Yeah - it's called changing times & consumer laws.

    No consumer laws permit an individual to neglect to take reasonable steps to fix an issue with their car and then claim full compensation for damage.

    Mind you the OP may succeed in getting full compensation depending on the attitude a judge may take to a convincing argument. The argument thus far does not really sound convincing.


Advertisement