dusk2dawn Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Hi chaps if there are any gen solicitors among us I could use a little advice concerning an item I bought which was mis-described and found to be faulty. Please pm thanks. Rgds Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christy Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Yep, they are called Trading Standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davecooper1 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Take it back and get your money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magus69 Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Here you go Rob this may help. http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/consumers/.../page38311.html Mike... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dusk2dawn Posted December 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Take it back and get your money back. Not possible unfortunately, the item is pre owned and from a "fellow shooter". Described as being in very good cond, hardly used, yet needs a repair before I can use it. Thanks for the link mike, could be useful. Rgds Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bb Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 When buying second hand isn't it a case of "caveat emptor", buyer beware? It beomes up to the conscience of the seller whether to refund or not. Not a lawyer, mind. So far been very lucky on the 'Bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Misrepresentation (fraudulent, innocent and negligent) binds both trade and private sellers. Rob, PM on way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) Edited December 24, 2009 by SteveM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_seagrave Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Afraid not mung, the protection offered by the consumer protection act is between consumer and trade sellers only. This is to ensure fitness for purpose, correspondance with description and satisfactory quality. That may well be the case for the Consumer Protection Act, but misrepresentation (Mungler's point) can vitiate any contract - even one between private individuals. And, as any fule kno, you don't even need to actually state your representation for it to constitute a misrepresentation (not for the last 20-odd years, anyway), it's just handy that in this case the seller did. Well, that's what a bloke down the pub told me. Good Luck D2D. LS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) ok Edited December 24, 2009 by SteveM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeymagic1969 Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Munglar is a qualified solicitor, so i would hazard a guess at him being the best one to comment!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marine1980 Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 I take it this is the same argument that has taken up about 6 pages on the other shooting site??? To be fair somebody has offered to take the broken scope off your hands for the same price you paid for it and pay for the repair themselves, so i take that you got it at a good price broke or not. Royal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabbitbosher Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Was it from Flea Bay ? Wb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Munglar is a qualified solicitor, so i would hazard a guess at him being the best one to comment!!! I therefore am not worthy. If my arguement was wrong, would appreciate if you could point out where mung, as this would correct any future views. I was actually going straight from my contract law teachings. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeymagic1969 Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Didn't say your not worthy Steve and i'm sure Mung will comment on this thread at some point today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Sweet, i know mate lol. Id like to know if im incorrectly quoting the law. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marine1980 Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) Was it from Flea Bay ? Wb No the other shooting forum i guess from the 6 page argument! Royal Edited December 23, 2009 by Marine1980 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_seagrave Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Misrepresentation in the public forum covers the item as a whole, not inherent/letent defects. There is no proof (unless dusk has some, which would be great) that dusk did not know of the defect, he may have just adjusted his valuation/offer to suit. There is also no proof that it was damaged at the time of sale (again, unless dusk has proof, which again, would be great!) When buying privately, the known clause (its latin, so my best guess would be 20 years +) is Caveat Emptor - May the buyer beware. You are down to judge any misrepresentation before offering monies for goods/services. For arguements sake, say person A was selling a shotgun, and the firing pin nedeed replacing. This would not deem the gun unfit for purpose, or misrepresented. It could still be deemed 'in good condition' and 'hardly used'. Yes, neglecting to mentuion a fault is dishonest and damn right out of order, but is not covered by any enforceable law, as the onus is on the person making the offer (cash) to satisfy themselves that the item is fit for the purpose they require it for, within the remit of private transactions. Person B (buyer) would need ascertain they are happy with the condition of the item, prior to making a cash offer based upon this inspection (sold as seen). If this were a shop/business selling the item then you would have an avenue to seek damges/refunded monies as you would be covered by the consumer act and its all mighty power, as the item must be fit for purpose under the act. Ofcoarse, you would not expect anyone to knowingly sell an object that is faulty, especially to a fellow shooter/enthusiast. And this person should be strung up! But I am only pointing out where the law stands. Your point "And, as any fule kno, you don't even need to actually state your representation for it to constitute a misrepresentation (not for the last 20-odd years, anyway), it's just handy that in this case the seller did." - Do you know that the seller listed the item as in perfect, factory sealed condition, ready to use in any purpose that one could imagine? Im not trying to be a bug bear, but there are so many ways legally that a t*sser like this could wrangle theyre way out of this, with a plethora of different arguements about offer and fitness for purpose. Hopefully we have a fully qualified solicitor on the forum who can confirm this for me............ SM D2D considers the item to have been mis-described, but without knowing what was said, I agree that it's impossible for either of us to call. What is apparent is that a case could certainly be made with the properly qualified legal advice, and I certainly hope that D2D's grievance is resolved to his satisfaction. As I said, that's just what the bloke down the pub told me... LS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) Office party last night so I will keep this brief. Consumer protection legislation is only good for BtoC transactions. However, misrep can be applied anywhere and works for CtoC transactions. If you sell something and state "good working order" and it doesn't actually work, well that's a misrep - the remedy for the buyer is recission of the contract or damages. The key of course is evidence - there will be endless arguments about how when the seller put the item in the post it was working - there are plenty of people on ebay flogging broken stuff to pass on insurance claims to the postal carrier. EDIT: If you Google "misrepresentation" there's plenty info out there and in easily readable "1 pager format" Edited December 24, 2009 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjimlad Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 Seconded by another Solicitor. In a private sale, misrepresentation is often the only way to obtain redress for defective goods. Misrepresentation can be innocent, negligent, or fraudulent. There has to have been a positive statement about the quality or condition of the goods which was false at the time it was made. So if I was to say my car had 20,000 miles on it and it has 30,000, then that's a misrepresentation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPT1 Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) Golden Rules If buying anything find out where the vendor lives, where their Mother lives and where any of their children live. Having worked in the building industry during the 1970s where the subbie disappeared on pay day I learnt to ensure at least finding them again. Edited December 24, 2009 by MPT1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 As Mungler has pointed out - it will be down to how the item was described - compared to how it actually was in reality - the devil would be in the detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magus69 Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 I posted a link to information on the Sale Of Goods act. This is what I would be looking to cite as goods sold whether commercially or privately are covered by this act.The act states that items sold MUST be fit for purpose and as DESCRIBED. Now I aint a clue about the item or how/where it was originally advertised if it was described as in good condition or good working order then the buyer certainly has a case. Caveat Emptor would apply if the buyer signed a statement/receipt saying that he accepted the item in whatever condition at the time of sale,accepting known or unknown defects. Mike... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.