Tweet
Hi everyone, I'd really appreciate advice on the following. A bit of an epic I'm afraid, but it is an interesting one.
In August 2013 I bought a "Smart TV" from a large high street retailer. Put simply, when I played around with it I found it did not have the features that were listed on the retailer's website; these were features I specifically wanted and paid a high premium for.
I wrote to the retailer (recorded delivery) requesting a straight swap with another model with the same selling price. They ignored my letter so I sent them a LBA (also recorded delivery) which they also ignored.
In October 2013 I issued a claim (for approx £400), rejecting the TV and claiming its full cost as it was not as described.
The defendant assigned the case to a "legal officer" within its company. I would describe behaviour of this individual over the last 12 months as bizarre; her sole aim seems to have been to frustrate and delay everything, whilst running up big costs to her employer in the process, not to mention wasting the court's time and my own time.
Yet, annoyingly, the court has allowed her to commandeer the whole process, to my detriment, and contrary to the "Overriding Objectives" in the CPRs - i.e. proportionality and expeditiousness.
Over the last year, at the defendant's request, there have been two "preliminary hearings" attended in person by both parties (I have lost two half-days from my holiday entitlement), ostensibly to discuss the case and arrange for the defendant to inspect the TV.
I have never alleged the TV to be faulty. The issues in my claim are not manufacture faults - I am saying that the TV is not as described. In other words, this is a case of mis-selling.
There was no need to "inspect" my TV as its specification is inherent to the particular model, and is well documented by the manufacturer. The defendant could have easily checked an identical model on the shelf of its own store to confirm the issues raised in my claim.
Furthermore, my claim is based on the premise that the defendant had already been given opportunities to inspect/repair/replace before I issued the claim but chose to completely ignore my letters. Thus my argument is that the contract has already been breached, and the matter for the court is to decide whether I am correct in asserting this, and if so, to order an appropriate remedy.
I tried my best to argue the above points to the judge but to no avail. The judge took up the defendant's red herrings and ordered that the TV be returned to the defendant whereupon they kept it for 3 weeks, before finally returning it with a report that pretty much confirmed everything in my claim.
A final hearing was set for 1 August 2014 (even though it was unclear on what basis the defendant was continuing to defend the claim).
I actually changed the dates of my pre-booked summer holiday in order that I could attend the hearing.
On 16 July, completely out of the blue, an order arrived from the court stating "Upon reading a letter from the defendant the hearing on 1 August 2014 is vacated." That was it - there was no indication of what was contained in the defendant's letter, or what was going to happen next.
I was by this point very annoyed. The CPRs (23.4) state that the other party must be served with a copy of the application notice, which did not happen. Furthermore, the order should have mentioned that I was entitled to apply to vary or set aside the order if 23.4 was breached, but this information was not included.
Nevertheless I appealed against this order. Seven weeks passed and I heard nothing from the court. It was clear to me at this stage that the court was not treating both parties equally; it was dancing to the defendant's tune whilst repeatedly ignoring my representations.
I made a formal complaint to the court and received a cursory reply from the court manager (with no hint of apology), stating that my appeal had not been processed because of the court's heavy workload. (This does not explain why the defendant had its earlier application to vacate the hearing granted within 48 hours!).
I have just had another order stating the next hearing will take place in February 2015 - sixteen months after I made the claim. To my mind there is no acceptable reason that this should have dragged on for so long, and this case is a shining example of everything the CPRs are supposed to guard against.
There has still been no explanation from the court as to why they allowed the defendant's application to vacate the August hearing.
Given everything that has happened, I am now worried about the probity of the court in the forthcoming hearing.
There are two main questions (although I'd welcome any thoughts on the wider issues):
1. I have kept the TV in storage in my spare bedroom since making this claim, as my understanding of the law on "rejection" is that you must stop using an item from the moment you make the claim. Given the way that consumer electronic items rapidly drop in value, I am concerned that if I lose the case and sell the TV e.g. on eBay to recover some money, then my losses will have been exacerbated by the unreasonable delays in this case. Am I right to continue to hang on to the TV - i.e. if my claim for rejection is successful, will the court order me to give the TV back to the defendant?
2. Given the illogical behaviour of the defendant's "legal officer", is it worth me trying to go over her head to someone at the top, and basically explaining that there is no business sense in the way she is carrying on? She has already made 2 trips to the court, each at 180 miles return from head office, and must have cost the company a fortune in postage, courier fees to collect/return the TV, etc. All for a claim of £400. It makes no sense to me, especially when I made it clear, even after issuing the claim, that all I ever wanted was to swap the TV for another model. I don't understand what she is trying to achieve; all I know (from a bit of Googling) is that she's straight out of law school and seems to revel in her moments in court.
In August 2013 I bought a "Smart TV" from a large high street retailer. Put simply, when I played around with it I found it did not have the features that were listed on the retailer's website; these were features I specifically wanted and paid a high premium for.
I wrote to the retailer (recorded delivery) requesting a straight swap with another model with the same selling price. They ignored my letter so I sent them a LBA (also recorded delivery) which they also ignored.
In October 2013 I issued a claim (for approx £400), rejecting the TV and claiming its full cost as it was not as described.
The defendant assigned the case to a "legal officer" within its company. I would describe behaviour of this individual over the last 12 months as bizarre; her sole aim seems to have been to frustrate and delay everything, whilst running up big costs to her employer in the process, not to mention wasting the court's time and my own time.
Yet, annoyingly, the court has allowed her to commandeer the whole process, to my detriment, and contrary to the "Overriding Objectives" in the CPRs - i.e. proportionality and expeditiousness.
Over the last year, at the defendant's request, there have been two "preliminary hearings" attended in person by both parties (I have lost two half-days from my holiday entitlement), ostensibly to discuss the case and arrange for the defendant to inspect the TV.
I have never alleged the TV to be faulty. The issues in my claim are not manufacture faults - I am saying that the TV is not as described. In other words, this is a case of mis-selling.
There was no need to "inspect" my TV as its specification is inherent to the particular model, and is well documented by the manufacturer. The defendant could have easily checked an identical model on the shelf of its own store to confirm the issues raised in my claim.
Furthermore, my claim is based on the premise that the defendant had already been given opportunities to inspect/repair/replace before I issued the claim but chose to completely ignore my letters. Thus my argument is that the contract has already been breached, and the matter for the court is to decide whether I am correct in asserting this, and if so, to order an appropriate remedy.
I tried my best to argue the above points to the judge but to no avail. The judge took up the defendant's red herrings and ordered that the TV be returned to the defendant whereupon they kept it for 3 weeks, before finally returning it with a report that pretty much confirmed everything in my claim.
A final hearing was set for 1 August 2014 (even though it was unclear on what basis the defendant was continuing to defend the claim).
I actually changed the dates of my pre-booked summer holiday in order that I could attend the hearing.
On 16 July, completely out of the blue, an order arrived from the court stating "Upon reading a letter from the defendant the hearing on 1 August 2014 is vacated." That was it - there was no indication of what was contained in the defendant's letter, or what was going to happen next.
I was by this point very annoyed. The CPRs (23.4) state that the other party must be served with a copy of the application notice, which did not happen. Furthermore, the order should have mentioned that I was entitled to apply to vary or set aside the order if 23.4 was breached, but this information was not included.
Nevertheless I appealed against this order. Seven weeks passed and I heard nothing from the court. It was clear to me at this stage that the court was not treating both parties equally; it was dancing to the defendant's tune whilst repeatedly ignoring my representations.
I made a formal complaint to the court and received a cursory reply from the court manager (with no hint of apology), stating that my appeal had not been processed because of the court's heavy workload. (This does not explain why the defendant had its earlier application to vacate the hearing granted within 48 hours!).
I have just had another order stating the next hearing will take place in February 2015 - sixteen months after I made the claim. To my mind there is no acceptable reason that this should have dragged on for so long, and this case is a shining example of everything the CPRs are supposed to guard against.
There has still been no explanation from the court as to why they allowed the defendant's application to vacate the August hearing.
Given everything that has happened, I am now worried about the probity of the court in the forthcoming hearing.
There are two main questions (although I'd welcome any thoughts on the wider issues):
1. I have kept the TV in storage in my spare bedroom since making this claim, as my understanding of the law on "rejection" is that you must stop using an item from the moment you make the claim. Given the way that consumer electronic items rapidly drop in value, I am concerned that if I lose the case and sell the TV e.g. on eBay to recover some money, then my losses will have been exacerbated by the unreasonable delays in this case. Am I right to continue to hang on to the TV - i.e. if my claim for rejection is successful, will the court order me to give the TV back to the defendant?
2. Given the illogical behaviour of the defendant's "legal officer", is it worth me trying to go over her head to someone at the top, and basically explaining that there is no business sense in the way she is carrying on? She has already made 2 trips to the court, each at 180 miles return from head office, and must have cost the company a fortune in postage, courier fees to collect/return the TV, etc. All for a claim of £400. It makes no sense to me, especially when I made it clear, even after issuing the claim, that all I ever wanted was to swap the TV for another model. I don't understand what she is trying to achieve; all I know (from a bit of Googling) is that she's straight out of law school and seems to revel in her moments in court.
Comment