Tweet
Just joined, prompted by something husband is going through where someone is considering taking him to small claims court. He sold something privately and after several weeks he was contacted saying the item was faulty; he is a decent guy and looked into repairs as was concerned he'd missed something (despite the time lapse). Then on checking his original ad the photo showed this fault was not there, so he essentially bowed out and retracted his offer of help, explaining this was not a problem when he owned the item and had never had any issues. I can go into more detail in the right forum.
Loading...
-
Tags: None
-
So your husband has a photo that disproves what the purchaser is saying about the item. The delay of several weeks before complaining will not do the purchaser any good. If it was defective why did he not claim immediately? Or did the purchaser break it? -
It was a private sale
The item was not misdescribed
He can show the fault was not present at the time anyway
So there should be no problem disputing any claim, but it may revolve on how the offer to repair was made and how it was then withdrawn.Comment
-
He initially asked my husband - was he aware of the issue and my husband responded absolutely not, he was quite shocked and worried he had missed something as was being implied, so said he'd look to repair. When he got home from work, he asked to see a photo of the fault and then compared to photo in ad. He pointed out that there was evidence in the ad photo to show no existence of fault shown in buyer's photo, and so he was relieved and satisfied there was no fault when he sent and so would not be looking further at repair. Interestingly, the guy had obviously seen that the ad photo didn't have fault, as when my husband pointed to the photo, the buyer admitted he'd seen it but thought it was an old photo. Our concern is - has my husband's inherent decency gone against him by showing a willingness to believe guy and be worried enough to look to sort problem out?Originally posted by des8 View Post
It was a private sale
The item was not misdescribed
He can show the fault was not present at the time anyway
So there should be no problem disputing any claim, but it may revolve on how the offer to repair was made and how it was then withdrawn.Comment
-
This was my reaction when my husband came home. However, he was worried he had maybe missed something and so felt honour bound to offer to repair. However, when he revisited the ad and saw the photo, he saw there was no evidence of this fault and felt huge relief. He had never had any issues with this lens and so had been a bit bewildered; he thought when he pointed the evidence to the buyer they would realise it had occurred after despatch.Originally posted by ostell View PostComment
-
IMO your OH has no need to worry.
When buying privately the buyer has to take care (caveat emptor)
The seller's duties are not to mislead the buyer, not to described,the goods incorrectly.
If the fault is obvious, as ostell why didn't the buyer point it out as soon as he received the item?Comment
-
The buyer said he hadn't noticed the zoom lens didn't open fully - in the photo (very fortunately) it is actually open to much further than buyer stated. If the fault was there straight away then it could have been an issue for compensation against postage company as can see not a problem, but that's too late now. Basically, any offer my husband made he retracted when the photo confirmed the lack of this issue; the buyer is using my husband's initial offer as evidence my husband knew there was something wrong; but the zoom lens was stuck at less than shown in ad photo. We both cannot see how he has a case, but is not nice and has put us off ever selling privately.Comment
-
That is not much evidence of the fault existing at the time of sale.Originally posted by reggie10 View Post
Comment
-
This is what I think; it seems like there is no case to answer but is creating a lot of worry.Originally posted by des8 View Post
Thanks to everyone for their contributions.Comment
-
The buyer has probably dropped it or done something to damage it and is trying to get it repaired by your husband.Comment
-
Apparently this damage is classed as dropped, but can just happen at any time to this lens. It is feasible something could have happened in transit, but we paid for insured delivery and it is surely his responsibility to check on arrival. I suspect he knows this - at no point has he considered this possibility, or the possibility it might just have 'failed' or that it was knocked in his possession - as far as he's concerned my husband is responsible. We will reply to the latest email regarding his claim that my husband knowingly selling him a faulty lens based on his original offer of repair, but after that I think we will stop communicating with him. From then on I'm not sure what he will do.Comment
-
If you are responding, only deny any liability and tell him you do not expect any further correspondence .
Further communications will be taken as harassment.
Comment
-
It looks like he is going ahead with a claim as he made offer to go halves and when husband again queried the grounds for this, he said he had to try before filling form in. In Scotland, it looks like he fills in claim form, we then can refute claim - then a court date booked. My question is: once we refute claim can the sheriff look at case and decide no case or once process starts does it have to go to court? I am pretty sure he will fill in the form as only costs £19 and no expenses would be paid for us to go up to Scotland, so a cheap way to try and get £ back.Comment
-
The sheriff has the following options when there is a dispute:- refer both parties in the case for alternative dispute resolution
- arrange a case management discussion
- arrange a hearing
- consider whether or not to make a decision about the claim without a hearing
- dismiss the claim or make a decision because the claim is unlikely to be successful.
You will also have to consider if it is worthwhile contesting viewing your likely expenses and the stress involved.
(you live in Southern England?)
A galling decision to make, but perhaps a pragmatic one.,
tagging ScottishSolicitor for further commentComment
Comment