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

Not happy with bespoke Hat.. have I any rights?

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    2RockMountain
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,012 ✭✭✭2RockMountain


    rock22 wrote: »
    Why do you keep posting about faulty goods?

    Because a failure to meet a design specification is a fault.


  • Options
    #33
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    2RockMountain wrote: »
    Because a failure to meet a design specification is a fault.

    In your opinion. Can the person who "copied" the hat be expected to have the same materials and skill as the original designer? Even the original designer may not be able to exactly reproduce the hat if it is hand made.

    I'd like an original Picasso but if I buy a print/copy of it, I don't expect the exact same painting as the original.

    Is a hat bespoke if it is a copy of someone else's design?


  • Options
    #34
    intheclouds
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,175 ✭✭✭intheclouds


    davo10 wrote: »
    In your opinion. Can the person who "copied" the hat be expected to have the same materials and skill as the original designer? Even the original designer may not be able to exactly reproduce the hat if it is hand made.

    I'd like an original Picasso but if I buy a print/copy of it, I don't expect the exact same painting as the original.

    Is a hat bespoke if it is a copy of someone else's design?

    No but if the function of a fascinator is to be attached to the hair and stand up under its own structure and this one failed to do so - then its faulty.

    The OP stated that the thing had no structure and was a mess on her head. So it was faulty.


  • Options
    #35
    2RockMountain
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,012 ✭✭✭2RockMountain


    davo10 wrote: »
    In your opinion. Can the person who "copied" the hat be expected to have the same materials and skill as the original designer? Even the original designer may not be able to exactly reproduce the hat if it is hand made.

    I'd like an original Picasso but if I buy a print/copy of it, I don't expect the exact same painting as the original.

    Is a hat bespoke if it is a copy of someone else's design?

    This is nothing to do with 'copy / exact same / exactly reproduce'. You've brought those terms into the discussion now, the OP never mentioned this. The fault in the product was not that it failed to be 'an exact copy', but it certainly failed to meet the OP's design criteria.


  • Options
    #36
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    2RockMountain wrote: »
    This is nothing to do with 'copy / exact same / exactly reproduce'. You've brought those terms into the discussion now, the OP never mentioned this. The fault in the product was not that it failed to be 'an exact copy', but it certainly failed to meet the OP's design criteria.

    Read the first two paragraphs of the op, op is unhappy about how it looks but accepted it even though she was offered a refund. Now it is a change of mind.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    rock22
    Registered Users Posts: 1,626 ✭✭✭rock22


    2RockMountain wrote: »
    Because a failure to meet a design specification is a fault.
    2RockMountain wrote: »
    This is nothing to do with 'copy / exact same / exactly reproduce'. You've brought those terms into the discussion now, the OP never mentioned this. The fault in the product was not that it failed to be 'an exact copy', but it certainly failed to meet the OP's design criteria.
    What design specification/criteria.
    The OP said she gave the milliner photographs and asked her to copy the hat. Was material /structure/support/ etc specified? If so, the OP never mentioned it.


  • Options
    #38
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    i gave the the lady (milliner) 8 pic's of a hat/fascinator = I asked her if she could copy it (in all aspects of the design - colour, and design).


  • Options
    #39
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    sporina wrote: »
    i gave the the lady (milliner) 8 pic's of a hat/fascinator = I asked her if she could copy it (in all aspects of the design - colour, and design).

    Why did you accept it then when you were offered a refund, once you accept it, it's yours.


  • Options
    #40
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    davo10 wrote: »
    Why did you accept it then when you were offered a refund, once you accept it, it's yours.

    you can read the thread - this has been answered twice already


  • Options
    #41
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    sporina wrote: »
    you can read the thread - this has been answered twice already

    I know it has, the question is rhetorical.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    davo10 wrote: »
    I know it has, the question is rhetorical.

    its irrelevant as she offered a refund and then offered to remake the hat (obviously realising she did not give me what I asked for)
    I gave her the chance to get it right - give her the benefit of doubt..

    didn't get around to calling consumer help today - will do so tomorrow..

    though i would say she has no rights as she is obviously no even paying any tax on her little earner..


  • Options
    #43
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    sporina wrote: »
    its irrelevant as she offered a refund and then offered to remake the hat (obviously realising she did not give me what I asked for)
    I gave her the chance to get it right - give her the benefit of doubt..

    didn't get around to calling consumer help today - will do so tomorrow..

    though i would say she has no rights as she is obviously no even paying any tax on her little earner..

    Ok, first of all, you are speculating on whether she is paying tax and that has no place in your discussions with her or anyone else. You are not privy to her tax returns. She has just as much rights as everyone else in a dispute like this irrespective of her tax compliance.

    You "gave her the chance to get it right" yet accepted the hat the second time of asking. I would say she now has more rights than you have, you had a second chance to reject it and didn't. Also the fact that she offered you a refund (which you rejected) will very much work in her favour and the fact that you rejected it and accepted the hat a second time, against you.


  • Options
    #44
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    sporina wrote: »
    its irrelevant as she offered a refund and then offered to remake the hat (obviously realising she did not give me what I asked for)
    I gave her the chance to get it right - give her the benefit of doubt..

    didn't get around to calling consumer help today - will do so tomorrow..

    though i would say she has no rights as she is obviously no even paying any tax on her little earner..

    You keep raising the red herring of her tax affairs. It didn't worry you when you commissioned the headgear. Tax paying or not tax paying has no bearing on the law with regard to returns and refunds nor Change of Mind. Consumer Affairs have no interest in tax.


  • Options
    #45
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    Fernando Putrid Second wrote: »
    You keep raising the red herring of her tax affairs. It didn't worry you when you commissioned the headgear. Tax paying or not tax paying has no bearing on the law with regard to returns and refunds nor Change of Mind. Consumer Affairs have no interest in tax.

    like i said, it never even occurred to me; a friend mentioned it the other day..
    i just want a refund - if a reminder to her that she is not paying tax means I get it, then so be it


  • Options
    #46
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    sporina wrote: »
    like i said, it never even occurred to me; a friend mentioned it the other day..
    i just want a refund - if a reminder to her that she is not paying tax means I get it, then so be it

    If there's a way to get her back up and wreck your chances, then that is it.

    You have no right to threaten her about tax. You have no knowledge of her tax position. You have no additional rights one way or the other.


    This is becoming ludicrous.


  • Options
    #47
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Fernando Putrid Second wrote: »
    If there's a way to get her back up and wreck your chances, then that is it.

    You have no right to threaten her about tax. You have no knowledge of her tax position. You have no additional rights one way or the other.


    This is becoming ludicrous.

    Absolutely agree, i would suspect the op would be told to take a flying F if she mentions taxation, that would be the end of communication and I wouldn't bet her hat on her winning a case in the SCC given the account of what has happened.


  • Options
    #48
    njs030
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭njs030


    Have you actually asked her for a refund this time? This entire thread is pointless and not a consumer issue unless and until she says no....and as she originally offered one it's likely she'll agree.

    I'd suggest going in with honey rather than vinegar and seeing where that gets you rather than storming in with demands and rights and talk of taxes etc.
    Do that and if you get no joy then start worrying about consumer rights.

    At this point she's tried three times do she's clearly interested in doing the right thing for her customers.

    I actually don't know why you haven't called her TBH.


  • Options
    #49
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    notjustsweet wrote: »
    Have you actually asked her for a refund this time? This entire thread is pointless and not a consumer issue unless and until she says no....and as she originally offered one it's likely she'll agree.

    I'd suggest going in with honey rather than vinegar and seeing where that gets you rather than storming in with demands and rights and talk of taxes etc.
    Do that and if you get no joy then start worrying about consumer rights.

    At this point she's tried three times do she's clearly interested in doing the right thing for her customers.

    I actually don't know why you haven't called her TBH.

    if you read my initial post you would understand..

    in any case, i want to have my facts - be prepared for if and when i do need to ask for a refund

    also @scrammen and davo - obviously any mention of tax etc would be a last resort..
    i would prefer to stick to the law = and as no one here obviously knows what the laws are on such a service, then i will get the info from an official agency


  • Options
    #50
    njs030
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭njs030


    sporina wrote: »
    if you read my initial post you would understand..

    in any case, i want to have my facts - be prepared for if and when i do need to ask for a refund

    I did read it, I genuinely don't understand why you are determined to go in looking for a row.

    So you call her, you ask for a refund. She will either say yes or no. If she says yes happy days, if she says no then you can worry about it then.
    I'd say someone who has tried on three occasions to please you will probably be glad to be rid of the problem TBH.

    Unless your friend works in the tax office her opinion on this woman's tax status is ridiculous end will make you look utterly foolish if you bring it up as a "gentle reminder" aka a threat.


  • Options
    #51
    Arciphel
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭Arciphel


    How much did you pay for the item?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    notjustsweet wrote: »
    I did read it, I genuinely don't understand why you are determined to go in looking for a row.

    So you call her, you ask for a refund. She will either say yes or no. If she says yes happy days, if she says no then you can worry about it then.
    I'd say someone who has tried on three occasions to please you will probably be glad to be rid of the problem TBH.

    Unless your friend works in the tax office her opinion on this woman's tax status is ridiculous end will make you look utterly foolish if you bring it up as a "gentle reminder" aka a threat.

    like i said, when i told her initially that the hat was not how I had ordered, she went mad.. screaming at me on the phone - saying i offended her..

    eventually she said, ok i'll give it another go = therefore admitting it was not what was asked..

    and again like i said, i don't want another confrontation with her.. and i just want to know the facts - ie where the law stands on such a service..


  • Options
    #53
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,507 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    sporina wrote: »

    also @scrammen and davo - obviously any mention of tax etc would be a last resort..
    i would prefer to stick to the law = and as no one here obviously knows what the laws are on such a service, then i will get the info from an official agency

    Plenty of people know the law, you just didn't get the answer you would like.

    You accepted the product, the seller offered to modify it 2 times and you rejected a refund? You have no recourse what so ever. The best you can hope for is to approach the seller and politely request a refund.

    Her tax status means nothing to you, it doesn't affect the product or your rights, or hers for that matter. I guess bringing it up though without any justification will be a great way to earn a reputation for yourself so you'd want to be very very careful.


  • Options
    #54
    sporina
    Registered Users Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭sporina


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    Plenty of people know the law, you just didn't get the answer you would like.

    You accepted the product, the seller offered to modify it 2 times and you rejected a refund? You have no recourse what so ever. The best you can hope for is to approach the seller and politely request a refund.

    Her tax status means nothing to you, it doesn't affect the product or your rights, or hers for that matter. I guess bringing it up though without any justification will be a great way to earn a reputation for yourself so you'd want to be very very careful.

    no, no one has given me any laws here in relation to this issue - its a service i guess.. i asked for an item to be copied - gave 8 pics - she is not delivering..

    i do plan to ask for a refund.. and i would like to be prepared if she says no - hence i asked on here about the laws on such - but i have not got any answer so i will ask consumer help..

    this thread is proving to be the same this hat maker..

    i get no joy from arguing off or on line so i will speak to the professionals tomorrow


  • Options
    #55
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    sporina wrote: »
    no, no one has given me any laws here in relation to this issue - its a service i guess.. i asked for an item to be copied - gave 8 pics - she is not delivering..

    i do plan to ask for a refund.. and i would like to be prepared if she says no - hence i asked on here about the laws on such - but i have not got any answer so i will ask consumer help..

    this thread is proving to be the same this hat maker..

    i get no joy from arguing off or on line so i will speak to the professionals tomorrow

    The law is The Sale of Goods and Services Act. As a consumer you have rights under that law, if there is a problem with the merchandisable quality of the item, the vendor can offer you three remedies, repair, replacement or refund. You rejected the refund and accepted the goods. This now comes under the heading of "change of mind" as you were given the opportunity to inspect the appearance of the hat before accepting it. Therefore you are not entitled to remedy. That is the relevant law.

    http://www.consumerhelp.ie/changing-your-mind


  • Options
    #56
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    sporina wrote: »
    no, no one has given me any laws here in relation to this issue - its a service i guess.. i asked for an item to be copied - gave 8 pics - she is not delivering..

    You harp on about the law but conveniently ignore the law I already pointed out. Copying someone else's design is against the law!


  • Options
    #57
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    sporina wrote: »
    no, no one has given me any laws here in relation to this issue - its a service i guess.. i asked for an item to be copied - gave 8 pics - she is not delivering..

    i do plan to ask for a refund.. and i would like to be prepared if she says no - hence i asked on here about the laws on such - but i have not got any answer so i will ask consumer help..

    this thread is proving to be the same this hat maker..

    i get no joy from arguing off or on line so i will speak to the professionals tomorrow

    Excuse me, but I told you ages back that it was under law 'a Change of Mind'. However you didn't want to hear that piece of advise based on the law,


  • Options
    #58
    2RockMountain
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,012 ✭✭✭2RockMountain


    davo10 wrote: »
    Why did you accept it then when you were offered a refund, once you accept it, it's yours.
    There is no basis in law for this claim. 'Accepting it' is not an issue.
    sporina wrote: »
    like i said, it never even occurred to me; a friend mentioned it the other day..
    i just want a refund - if a reminder to her that she is not paying tax means I get it, then so be it
    It could very well backfire., as others have said.
    Fernando Putrid Second wrote: »
    Excuse me, but I told you ages back that it was under law 'a Change of Mind'. However you didn't want to hear that piece of advise based on the law,
    This has no basis in law.
    davo10 wrote: »
    The law is The Sale of Goods and Services Act. As a consumer you have rights under that law, if there is a problem with the merchandisable quality of the item, the vendor can offer you three remedies, repair, replacement or refund. You rejected the refund and accepted the goods. This now comes under the heading of "change of mind" as you were given the opportunity to inspect the appearance of the hat before accepting it. Therefore you are not entitled to remedy. That is the relevant law.

    http://www.consumerhelp.ie/changing-your-mind
    There is no basis in law to put this down as 'change of mind'. There is no formal acceptance, and there is no limit on the time taken to accept or reject. Unless you'd like to point out a particular section of the Sale of Goods Act that covers this scenario.


  • Options
    #59
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    2RockMountain wrote: »


    There is no basis in law to put this down as 'change of mind'. There is no formal acceptance, and there is no limit on the time taken to accept or reject. Unless you'd like to point out a particular section of the Sale of Goods Act that covers this scenario.

    Crikey, it's there on the link I provided. The op doesn't like the way it looks, after she paid and took possession of it. This isn't an online purchase so the 30 day distant selling legislation does not apply. She had the opportunity to look at it before she took it home so this is a change of mind.

    In regard to the "basis in law", Google "change of mind consumer rights", you'll find all the references you need. In case you can't do that:

    http://pdst.ie/sites/default/files/NCA-Sale-of-goods booklet.pdf


  • Options
    #60
    2RockMountain
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,012 ✭✭✭2RockMountain


    davo10 wrote: »
    Crikey, it's there on the link I provided. The op doesn't like the way it looks, after she paid and took possession of it. This isn't an online purchase so the 30 day distant selling legislation does not apply. She had the opportunity to look at it before she took it home so this is a change of mind.

    In regard to the "basis in law", Google "change of mind consumer rights", you'll find all the references you need. In case you can't do that:

    http://pdst.ie/sites/default/files/NCA-Sale-of-goods%20booklet.pdf

    This isn't about 'change of mind'. This is about goods not fit for purpose, not meeting the design specification. There is nothing in law to suggest that because she took the item away from the shop, she has automatically accepted that they were fit for purpose.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    2RockMountain wrote: »
    This isn't about 'change of mind'. This is about goods not fit for purpose, not meeting the design specification. There is nothing in law to suggest that because she took the item away from the shop, she has automatically accepted that they were fit for purpose.

    Again you are missing the point, again, the op is unhappy with how it looks, it is there in the opening post. When you buy something and take it home, if you don't like how it looks on your head, that is change of mind.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement