Sale of Goods law (again)

[CCJ]

Hello everyone,

I need some help to establish whether I am correct in my interpretation of the law regarding the sale of goods act. It is not a very straight forward issue but I will try and keep it to the point.

• 2010 - purchase Aga cooker which includes installation of a steel external chimney. This was paid for in 2 parts 1 for the cooker, the remainder for the installation and chimney. Both by credit card to the sum of approx £7,500.
• 2011 - Enamel to the top plate crazes, reported to supplier installer within first 6 months and replaced free of charge
• 2011 through to 2012 - same fault appears 3 more times, top replaced twice.
• 2012 July - rejected by me on the grounds of the fault existing at point of delivery, fit for purpose, lack of conformity etc. use of cooker ceased. lack of response from supplier/installer.
• July - Claim under Section 75 to credit card company. All correspondence provided backing up the claim. Poor performance from CC company.
• Oct/November - AGA senior engineer comes to inspect, report to be forwarded.
• December - AGA confirm the issue with the cooker and confirm the will remove the cooker and refund in full. No report provided.

I am aware the section 75 claim can be pursued and claims for damages, I have already declared that there will be consequential losses associated with making good following removal.

My question is:

• is this termination or rescission of the contract?
• if it is can you terminate or rescind part of a contract (which I don't believe you can) both payments are under 1 contract of sale?
• under the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees EU directive, it states that any lack of conformity resulting from the installation is a lack of conformity of the goods. Does this apply to the chimney as I understand the problem was with the installation of the cooker?
• As the goods where not in conformity does this apply to multiple goods under the sale of goods act in this instance.

Ultimately where I need real help is do I have a leg to stand on in recouping the cost of the chimney?

Your knowledge and help is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

CCJ

[enquirer]

Re: Sale of Goods law (again)

I assume that AGA supplied the chimney. The chimney was installed specifically for the AGA. It is part of the same system and should go with the cooker. Goods not fit for the purpose.

[CCJ]

Re: Sale of Goods law (again)

Hi Enquirer,

Yes you are correct that the chimney and AGA was supplied and installed by the same company. The Chimney was specifically sized and installed to allow the installation of the AGA and for no other purpose.

To be clear, the supplier/installer is not AGA but it is AGA who have responded offering the refund. I have no contract with AGA but assume they are representing the supplier/installer since I got the credit card company involved.

As the chimney could be used for other purposes (although impractical unless installing a different stove) it is not only limited to the use of this appliance, wouldn't that deem it to not be a 'system', otherwise I could understand your point.

Thanks,

CCJ