Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

[JCE]

Further to reading this old thread:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...224#post122224


and as I find myself in a similar position with another CC provider - can anybody please fill me in how I can reject the CC provider's request (they send me a letter in response to my S75 claim) to provide them with an 'independent report' in order 'to consider' my section 75 claim (between 100-30k GBP). The items are not as described/ not of satisfactory quality, I have exceeded all communication with the seller and I have made both the seller and the CC provider aware of the faults within a 6 months time period - which according to Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Sale of Goods Act 1979 should make both the retailer and/or the CC provider liable to prove that the faults weren't inherent?!

According to information published by OFT and other sources SOGA assumes that any fault that develops during a 6 month period from the date of purchase is inherent and the onus is on the retailer (and CC provider for that matter) to prove otherwise.


So far I was met with some lack of knowledge/ignorance on behalf of the CC providers staff as they claimed they are only liable under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, not SOGA nor other statutory acts - which according to my understanding of the equal liability is nonsense?!

Which other statutory acts apply to the CC provider as well as it was a mail-order purchase?


Can I actually claim for the full amount as according to SOGA (the retailer delivered a replacement for one of the 2 items which also proved faulty) if a replacement is faulty one can for the full amount rather than cure or partial compensation?


I would very much appreciate qualified responses.


Many thanks,

[pt2537]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

Ok section 75 makes creditors jointly and severably liable for defective products.

What we need to do of course is firstly identify when the fault become obvious? was it a day after you purchased the item, a week? a year? that information would assist.

The issue about the SOGA really matters to establish a breach of contract as the SOGA implies terms into the contract with a consumer. If you have a breach of contract or a misrepresentation, then you can challenge the supplier or the creditor , to attack the creditor you rely on s75 CCA 1974.

Can you confirm what item it was, and when it was purchased?

[JCE]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

What we need to do of course is firstly identify when the fault become obvious? ...

Can you confirm what item it was, and when it was purchased?

The fault had become obvious short after delivery - approximately 8 days after ordering/paying for the item.
The 2 items are highly detailed models - one of which showed signs of previous usage/wear and the second one had parts broken off - purchased in July 2012.
The retailer initially replaced the one which had parts broken off by one of the current ones which has details missing and is in parts incorrectly assembled. The retailer was notified of the faults of the replacement item in August 2012. Following unsuccessful communication with the retailer between August 2012 and November 2012 I submitted a claim with the CC provider in December 2012 - all well within the 6 months period.

[pt2537]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

The fault had become obvious short after delivery - approximately 8 days after ordering/paying for the item.
The 2 items are highly detailed models - one of which showed signs of previous usage/wear and the second one had parts broken off - purchased in July 2012.
The retailer initially replaced the one which had parts broken off by one of the current ones which has details missing and is in parts incorrectly assembled. The retailer was notified of the faults of the replacement item in August 2012. Following unsuccessful communication with the retailer between August 2012 and November 2012 I submitted a claim with the CC provider in December 2012 - all well within the 6 months period.

Well in that case then the burden rests with the supplier to show the item was not faulty.

I think that you need to stand firm on s75 CCA 1974 if you wish to seek redress against the Creditor, then keep the pressure on them and dont take no for an answer

[JCE]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

I think that you need to stand firm on s75 CCA 1974 if you wish to seek redress against the Creditor, then keep the pressure on them and dont take no for an answer

Thanks, will do - try to get hold of one of the managers there tomorrow.

[TUTTSI]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

I posted this up yesterday http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mer-credit-act know your rights on section 75 consumer credit act. You should find this very useful.

[JCE]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

I posted this up yesterday http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mer-credit-act know your rights on section 75 consumer credit act. You should find this very useful.

Thanks very much, however it does not specify whether I've got to obediently jump through the hoops the CC provider presents to me - ie provide an independent report even if the item has become faulty within the 6 months period from the date of purchase.

At the moment the CC provider twists it in such a way, that they claim to accept liability and claim to have even contacted their legal department which confirmed that faults that show up within the first 6 months are considered to be inherent, yet still insist on an independent report which according to the information found on the OFT website should not be necessary as it should be the banks / suppliers responsibility to prove otherwise.

At the moment they will probably rather issue a deadlock letter rather than negotiating further which is a bit of a nonsense as it might take ages to be processed by the Financial Ombudsman.

Further advice would be much appreciated! Thanks

[pt2537]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

Thanks very much, however it does not specify whether I've got to obediently jump through the hoops the CC provider presents to me - ie provide an independent report even if the item has become faulty within the 6 months period from the date of purchase.

At the moment the CC provider twists it in such a way, that they claim to accept liability and claim to have even contacted their legal department which confirmed that faults that show up within the first 6 months are considered to be inherent, yet still insist on an independent report which according to the information found on the OFT website should not be necessary as it should be the banks / suppliers responsibility to prove otherwise.

At the moment they will probably rather issue a deadlock letter rather than negotiating further which is a bit of a nonsense as it might take ages to be processed by the Financial Ombudsman.

Further advice would be much appreciated! Thanks

LOL the creditor can go hump spiders frankly

If they want an independant report they can go get a report, but thats their problem not yours and it should not interfer with your rights to a refund. Frankly i would advise the creditor that they are jointly liable and if they do not offer a refund then you will sue them

[TUTTSI]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

You can always write to the CEO... to get it sorted.

Thanks very much, however it does not specify whether I've got to obediently jump through the hoops the CC provider presents to me - ie provide an independent report even if the item has become faulty within the 6 months period from the date of purchase.

At the moment the CC provider twists it in such a way, that they claim to accept liability and claim to have even contacted their legal department which confirmed that faults that show up within the first 6 months are considered to be inherent, yet still insist on an independent report which according to the information found on the OFT website should not be necessary as it should be the banks / suppliers responsibility to prove otherwise.

At the moment they will probably rather issue a deadlock letter rather than negotiating further which is a bit of a nonsense as it might take ages to be processed by the Financial Ombudsman.

Further advice would be much appreciated! Thanks

[CleverClogs]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

LOL the creditor can go hump spiders frankly

Is that legal? :rofl:

[MissFM]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

Is that legal? :rofl:

:spider:Hmm I wonder

[JCE]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

You can always write to the CEO... to get it sorted.

Thanks - good idea!!!

[JCE]

Re: Successful Section 75 Refund - Which statutory laws apply?

You can always write to the CEO... to get it sorted.

Will try the directors of the relevant departments first - I'd appreciate being pointed in the direction of where to find the legal basis for the 6 months period - 'burden of proof' rule?