DFS legally binding contract

goz83

Bepolite wrote: »

Thanks for that... I tend to look at legislation rather than the dictionary but hey ho. For Example:

SCHEDULE 3

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts

1. Terms which have the object or effect of:

( d ) permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the party cancelling the contract;

OP Look at your contract with DFS, if it doesn't provide for compensation in the event they don't fulfill the contract, you may be able to use the Small Claims Procedure to get your deposit back...

OH wait you were the greasy, dishonest type of person that was quite willing to leave your deposit with them... how dishonourable of you.

I don't see where that says the consumer can just change his mind after signing the contract in this case. The seller was fulfilling their end.

Oh and the OP was trying to get his deposit back, but failed.

goz83

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

They very well would be, as I had never agreed to pay the remainder via card, so the money on my card may have been there for a very important reason, so dipping my bank account in a chance to get paid would be very sneaky.

if they are annoying me too much I always got this to throw back at them

Section 11 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997

And the material you chose may have even the last of it left in stock and another customer may have been let down, because you ordered a sofa with that exact material and DFS may have lost another sale because of it.

You agreed to buy the sofa. You may say different, but I bet the balance was going to be paid by card. In any case, you decided to breach the the contract. If you were left stuck had DFS charged your card, it would have been well deserved IMO. It would have been a lot less sneaky than what you have done. They were owed the money from you and you lied to your bank about a lost card to try to stop them from possibly charging your card.

Bepolite

goz83 wrote: »

I don't see where that says the consumer can just change his mind after signing the contract in this case. The seller was fulfilling their end.

Oh and the OP was trying to get his deposit back, but failed.

Firstly it recognises that consumers (and companies) may breach contracts. It then attempts to level the paying field. I'm sorry that I've not got across to you why consumer contracts are treated differently to contracts conceived between parties with parity of arms.

I'm fairly certain DFS's T&Cs will not comply with the Unfair terms regs and therefore they have no basis to hold on to the OP's deposit. That said if you wish to conduct a though into their T&Cs in order to score points it's all helpful to the OP in the end.

goz83

Bepolite wrote: »

Firstly it recognises that consumers (and companies) may breach contracts. It then attempts to level the paying field. I'm sorry that I've not got across to you why consumer contracts are treated differently to contracts conceived between parties with parity of arms.

I'm fairly certain DFS's T&Cs will not comply with the Unfair terms regs and therefore they have no basis to hold on to the OP's deposit. That said if you wish to conduct a though into their T&Cs in order to score points it's all helpful to the OP in the end.

When i read that earlier, i took the second "latter" to be the supplier, which on second perusal does not stack up and i see it still referred to the consumer. That's what happens when reading legal jargon on a phone

I sincerely doubt the OP will see a deposit returned and I still hold the opinion that he acted in the wrong, which is perhaps why he may have decided to open an alt account (speculating here) ask for opinions in this forum.

Bepolite

goz83 wrote: »

When i read that earlier, i took the second "latter" to be the supplier, which on second perusal does not stack up and i see it still referred to the consumer. That's what happens when reading legal jargon on a phone

I sincerely doubt the OP will see a deposit returned and I still hold the opinion that he acted in the wrong, which is perhaps why he may have decided to open an alt account (speculating here) ask for opinions in this forum.

I'm not faulting you for having an opinion and based on strict contract law you're right. The law has simply developed in the area. I'm also not asserting I'm 100% correct as I've no specialist knowledge beyond reading the statute book and Kings Inns manual between sips of my pint.

Marcusm

Bepolite wrote: »

I'm fairly certain DFS's T&Cs will not comply with the Unfair terms regs and therefore they have no basis to hold on to the OP's deposit.

Given that they have been in place in the UK for approx 20 years, I'd be surprised if some trading standards officers hadn't gotten on their high horse about something as basic as this; surely a company as large as DFS would have been challenged on this point and would have found a nice weaselly way of complying with the provision without actually extending their exposure.:cool:

Bepolite

Marcusm wrote: »

Given that they have been in place in the UK for approx 20 years, I'd be surprised if some trading standards officers hadn't gotten on their high horse about something as basic as this; surely a company as large as DFS would have been challenged on this point and would have found a nice weaselly way of complying with the provision without actually extending their exposure.:cool:

To be honest I've been out of the UK retail scence for years but I was always amazed hoe toothless trading standards where. To be frank it was the same issue as here; people are unaware of their rights, so don't complain and don;t enforce which just means people carry on doing what they've always done.

Off-topic but the amount fo times I've 'signed-out' of the working time directive here when signing an employment contract - completely unenforcebale (AFAIK) but there we go.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Hippo

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

if they are annoying me too much I always got this to throw back at them

Section 11 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997

S 11 is designed to counter extremely aggressive attempts to recover debts, I really doubt DFS are going to reach the requisite level.

Bepolite

Hippo wrote: »

S 11 is designed to counter extremely aggressive attempts to recover debts, I really doubt DFS are going to reach the requisite level.

Would pillow fights qualify?

howyegettinon1

goz83 wrote: »

When i read that earlier, i took the second "latter" to be the supplier, which on second perusal does not stack up and i see it still referred to the consumer. That's what happens when reading legal jargon on a phone

I sincerely doubt the OP will see a deposit returned and I still hold the opinion that he acted in the wrong, which is perhaps why he may have decided to open an alt account (speculating here) ask for opinions in this forum.

Just to make this clear, I wasn’t looking for the deposit back. I told DFS I cannot go ahead with the purchase and was willing to for fit my deposit.

They were notified after 3-4 days after contract was signed (will never know this for sure but I am certain the couch has not hit the production line at that stage) instead of cutting their losses they decided to make the couch, ship it to the store in Ireland and keep ringing me to collect it.

I have no problem losing the deposit, it is a reasonable penalty for pulling out of any deal, the problem I have is DFS's approach. There is no need to threat with debt collection agencies or the harassment over a bit of furniture.

goz83

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

Just to make this clear, I wasn’t looking for the deposit back. I told DFS I cannot go ahead with the purchase and was willing to for fit forfeit my deposit.

From your OP:

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

We contacted the store to cancel our order and looking to return our deposit. The store manager advised there is no way to cancel the order once it placed and you have signed the contract (in a very rude and pushy manner)

Quite clear, yep

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

They were notified after 3-4 days after contract was signed (will never know this for sure but I am certain the couch has not hit the production line at that stage) instead of cutting their losses they decided to make the couch, ship it to the store in Ireland and keep ringing me to collect it.

How could you be certain of this? I think one could reasonable assume that it had hit the production line 3-4 days after the order was placed, but one cannot be certain of course.

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

I have no problem losing the deposit, it is a reasonable penalty for pulling out of any deal, the problem I have is DFS's approach. There is no need to threat with debt collection agencies or the harassment over a bit of furniture.

From your OP:

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

We look for some advice from the citzens information on cancelation policies, deposit returns and cooling of periods, between all we dont have a leg to stand on.

You certainly had enough of a problem to contact citizens advice about returning deposits. I don't suppose they suggested you pretend you were intoxicated at the time of purchase, did they? :rolleyes:

Back to your OP:

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

we had put down a 200 euro deposit and signed a legaly binding contract (which of course we didnt read or think too much of at the time of the purchase)

Paying them for the couch is not an option. Where can we go from here?

We all know how honourable you have been to what you described as a legally binding contract. After some talk of intoxication, fraud and downright lies, you decided that cancelling your card was the right way to avoid paying the legally binding contract you signed. You had already decided that paying for the couch was not an option, where, in truth, it was just not an option you wanted to entertain. You presumably had the funds in place at the time and admitted that the used furniture was a tiny fraction of the price (€200 ?), so you must have still had the capacity to purchase the furniture you ordered.

Thanks for making it clear. :pac:

knucklehead6

A company i worked for once took a deposit on floor tiles.

They couldn't fulfil the order (as the manufacturer had discontinued this particular shade), and were taken to court for breach of contract.

I wonder would the OP have been as forgiving as he thinks DFS should be, if it had been in the same situation, that they couldn't fulfil the order as that particular shade had been discontinued?

I reckon he'd be on here bleating about breach of contract and how he was out of pocket and had to buy another sofa from a relative, and the embarrassment of having to go to a relative and having a second hand sofa in his house when he had been really looking forward to his brand new sofa.....

howyegettinon1

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

I advised the manager i will not be taking the couch and i am willing to forfit my deposit at this stage.

Their reply is you bought this couch, you own it and end of!! The outstanding balance will be passed to a debt collection agency.

We look for some advice from the citzens information on cancelation policies, deposit returns and cooling of periods, between all we don’t have a leg to stand on.

Paying them for the couch is not an option. Where can we go from here?

Thanks in advance

Yes of course anyone would see if they can get their deposit back, would be foolish not to try, and as you can see above its clearly stated in the post "i am willing to forfit my deposit at this stage".

To say this again this thread was not about losing a deposit. It’s about DFS not cancelling the contract, legal advice and if there is a legal loop hole that could be used to get out of the contract (getting out of the contract with out penalties even a better option if possible)

All this talk about honour and honesty? I’m sure anyone who brought this up so far would love a loophole not to pay property TAX or the water charges, don’t think bending the truth would bother you too much if it meant an extra thousand or two in your pocket each year.

howyegettinon1

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I reckon he'd be on here bleating about breach of contract and how he was out of pocket and had to buy another sofa from a relative, and the embarrassment of having to go to a relative and having a second hand sofa in his house when he had been really looking forward to his brand new sofa.....

That’s a very big assumption there.

goz83

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

Yes of course anyone would see if they can get their deposit back, would be foolish not to try, and as you can see above its clearly stated in the post "i am willing to forfit my deposit at this stage".

You said you were not looking for your deposit back. I just reminded you that you had in fact, tried to a number of times get it back. You're only willing to forfeit what you know you cannot get back (imo).

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

To say this again this thread was not about losing a deposit. It’s about DFS not cancelling the contract, legal advice and if there is a legal loop hole that could be used to get out of the contract (getting out of the contract with out penalties even a better option if possible)

Yes. And there were certainly a few colourful suggestions given by yourself, as to how you might get out of a legally binding contract. In the end, stitching up your pockets and burying your head in the sand was your preferred choice, for the most part.

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

All this talk about honour and honesty? I’m sure anyone who brought this up so far would love a loophole not to pay property TAX or the water charges, don’t think bending the truth would bother you too much if it meant an extra thousand or two in your pocket each year.

Very different situations. Taxes on a home already owned and charges on something most people (including government) agree we already pay for. You're getting into a sand storm with that, but I will use your own words to answer......

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

That’s a very big assumption there.

howyegettinon1

I agree breaching a contract automatically puts you in the wrong, but losing a deposit should be the penalty for that, no need for court appearances and debt collection.
DFS have gained nothing from this other than a bad name.

We can go back and forward all day with this, how colourful my suggestions are and how different our opinions are on what is right and wrong.

Got all the advice I was looking plus few colourful opinions

1. DFS legally binding contracts once signed are nearly impossible to get out of, unless they fail to deliver bespoke item by the agreed date.
2. Debt collectors operating in Ireland have no more power that a civilian.
3. If DFS are to threaten you with legal actions and debt collection agencies there is a slim to none chance they will pursue you.
4. Handing a deposit over even without signing anything still means you are entering a contract

5. STAY THE F*** AWAY FROM DFS

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Rubberchikken

If DFS has such a poor customer service, why do people still insist on buying from them.
tbh i'd sit on the floor and save to purchase a sofa from a local furniture shop before i'd go in their door.
i've never even stepped into one of their shops based on the reviews i've read both online and in print.

goz83

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

I agree breaching a contract automatically puts you in the wrong, but losing a deposit should be the penalty for that, no need for court appearances and debt collection.
DFS have gained nothing from this other than a bad name.

We can go back and forward all day with this, how colourful my suggestions are and how different our opinions are on what is right and wrong.

Got all the advice I was looking plus few colourful opinions

1. DFS legally binding contracts once signed are nearly impossible to get out of, unless they fail to deliver bespoke item by the agreed date.
2. Debt collectors operating in Ireland have no more power that a civilian.
3. If DFS are to threaten you with legal actions and debt collection agencies there is a slim to none chance they will pursue you.
4. Handing a deposit over even without signing anything still means you are entering a contract

5. STAY THE F*** AWAY FROM DFS

Well i'm glad you were educated during the process. You forgot point 6...

It's fraudulent to claim to have been intoxicated while signing a contract, if indeed you are not intoxicated.


I think DFS should charge bigger deposits. I bet you wouldnt have let €500 go so easily and might have just accepted the outstanding amount.

Vikings

howyegettinon1 wrote: »

DFS have gained nothing from this other than a bad name.

DFS have done nothing of the sort from this.

Whether they get a bad rep for something else so be it, i've never had any dealings with them nor do I plan to.

But just because you have a bad taste in your mouth because you backed out of something you agreed to does not make DFS the bad guy in this scenario. Quite the opposite.

Where do you draw the line on not following through with contracts you enter into because they don't suit you anymore?

Bepolite

Vikings wrote: »

Where do you draw the line on not following through with contracts you enter into because they don't suit you anymore?

At losing the deposit.