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

Small Claims- Replacement only no refund

Options
  • 05-07-2010 3:04pm
    #1
    Sparky J
    Registered Users Posts: 40 ✭


    Hi,
    I sent a faulty good back to a company to get repaired and after two months sent them a registered letter because I hadn't got it back off them. No response to that so made a small claim about a month later.
    Company has replied to them saying they admit the fault etc and there was a delay getting a part which is why they had it so long. Now they apparently have it and are willing to send it on.

    Question is do I have to accept the replacement at this stage or can I demand a refund as it took so long to get back?

    or do I have to go to the district court to do that thereby not making it worth the cost of doing it.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    You can't force a particular outcome, you can only ask. If they are proceeding with replacing or repairing the broken item, then that is reasonable. Has the SCC given it's judgement? Only the court can force a particular solution, but I'd find it hard to believe that they would rule against the shop that is actually honouring their responsibilities by offering the replacement.


  • Options
    #3
    Sparky J
    Registered Users Posts: 40 ✭Sparky J


    Thanks for reply.

    I haven't exactly got a judgement from SCC, got a letter saying the company disputes the claim I made and attached a letter they received from the company and told to ring the claims registrar.

    The letter accepts it was faulty and has not been returned to me, just disputed the particulars (i.e why it was delayed). And now says they will send it on.

    I don't see how they are disputing my claim for starters (they admit responsibility)
    I don't feel that waiting over 3 months is reasonable.
    The only reason the shop is honoring their responsibilities is because they were forced to do it by me applying to the SCC.

    Rang the registrar and he more or less says the same as you and also said I should have gone to District Court if I just wanted money back, that the SCC is basically just an arbitrator.
    Does that mean even if they didn't dispute the claim that I still wouldn't have got a refund?, Just a replacement too?

    Just a bit pissed off with this company for wasting my time and money going through all this and would prefer to take my business elsewhere but looks like I'll have to accept a replacement.


  • Options
    #4
    MunsterCycling
    Registered Users Posts: 4,864 ✭✭✭MunsterCycling


    Name and shame, this is a matter of fact now not opinion.


  • Options
    #5
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    Sparky J wrote: »
    Does that mean even if they didn't dispute the claim that I still wouldn't have got a refund?, Just a replacement too?

    They would have been first asked to resolve the complaint, but offering a repair, replacement or refund. If they said they were prepared to offer any one of these, then the court would not force them into another, without a very good reason (like replacements don't exist, or would take an undue amount of time).


  • Options
    #6
    Sparky J
    Registered Users Posts: 40 ✭Sparky J


    jor el wrote: »
    They would have been first asked to resolve the complaint, but offering a repair, replacement or refund. If they said they were prepared to offer any one of these, then the court would not force them into another, without a very good reason (like replacements don't exist, or would take an undue amount of time).

    Thanks Jor el, been onto the SCC again and accepted the replacement being offered.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Sparky J
    Registered Users Posts: 40 ✭Sparky J


    MunsterCycling wrote: »
    Name and shame, this is a matter of fact now not opinion.

    Company was Equicom Ltd in Cobh, it was a reversing camera for a van, they have now taken it down off their .ie website (after I mentioned it in my letter to the SCC) because there supplier J&S Autos apparently doesn't supply them anymore. (This was their reason for delay)

    Although their .co.uk website still has the same €235 cameras up on that.


  • Options
    #8
    mullingar
    Registered Users Posts: 5,340 ✭✭✭mullingar


    A lot of these car/van reversing cameras are non-serviceable, basically no spare parts are available as its cheaper to replace with new.

    Just go to flea-bay and pick up one, there are literally thousands for sale.



    And yes, they are a must-have in a van when doing a parallel park


  • Options
    #9
    axer
    Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    OP you could have pushed for a refund under this section of the sale of goods act:
    (2) Where—

    ( a ) the buyer deals as consumer and there is a breach of a condition by the seller which, but for this subsection, the buyer would be compelled to treat as a breach of warranty, and

    ( b ) the buyer, promptly upon discovering the breach, makes a request to the seller that he either remedy the breach or replace any goods which are not in conformity with the condition,

    then, if the seller refuses to comply with the request or fails to do so within a reasonable time, the buyer is entitled:

    (i) to reject the goods and repudiate the contract, or

    (ii) to have the defect constituting the breach remedied elsewhere and to maintain an action against the seller for the cost thereby incurred by him.
    There is no way that 3 months is a reasonable time to wait.


  • Options
    #10
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    axer wrote: »
    OP you could have pushed for a refund under this section of the sale of goods act:
    There is no way that 3 months is a reasonable time to wait.

    Yes but it was circumstances outside of their control they claimed so they were attempting to be reasonable. Its a bit cloudy on things like this when the words "reasonable" are batted around.


  • Options
    #11
    axer
    Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    castie wrote: »
    Yes but it was circumstances outside of their control they claimed so they were attempting to be reasonable. Its a bit cloudy on things like this when the words "reasonable" are batted around.
    I know reasonableness comes into it but 3 months is no excuse.

    The law clearly specifies "fails to do so" which does not give leniency for circumstances outside of their control.
    then, if the seller refuses to comply with the request or fails to do so within a reasonable time, the buyer is entitled:

    In this case if after a month the seller could not remedy the breach then they should have refunded or at least replaced.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    castie wrote: »
    Yes but it was circumstances outside of their control they claimed so they were attempting to be reasonable. Its a bit cloudy on things like this when the words "reasonable" are batted around.
    afaik the op was never informed of this circumstance outside the shops control and it sounds like they had the item in their shop all the time hoping the op would just go away and forget it, then when faced with the small claims court they are into damage limitation and are trying to save face as well as money.

    even with the delay it is unreasonable to leave the op without what they paid for for three months and a temporary replacement should have been organised but as the shop did not do this they should now refund imo.


Advertisement