Food & Drink1 min ago
about Distance Selling Regulations
One of the laws I want to cite in my law suit is Distance Selling Regulations 2000. This follows my purchase of goods (a used car) from a dealer in France, bought over the Internet. I paid in advance on the strength of the advert., Emails and a phone conversation. My understanding of the DSR is that the whole transaction must take place without face to face contact including conclusion of the contract if this law is to be applicable. I would argue that mine is such a case in that I paid remotely before seeing the car. So the law should protect me and give me a cooling off period and right to reject the goods without reason. However, what/when is the "conclusion of the contract?" The definition I have found is that - in the supply of goods - payment concludes the contract because - at that stage - both parties are bound; one to buy and one to sell. If so, the contract in my case was concluded before delivery and the DSR would apply. The other grey area is that this law applies when the supplier is "organised to sell at a distance" ie, it doesn't just protect a buyer in a one-off situation when he/she has simply answered an ad. I think I can satisfy that principle in that this dealer advertises that he sells cars "without customers leaving their homes." So I can argue that his organisation is set up as an Internet seller. Does anyone have any more info. or/and experience of something like this, please?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Amilcar. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I spent months finding out the answer to that question. The answer is in that for consumer contracts within the EU the laws are harmonised. So, in theory, I as an English customer can sue the French dealer under English/EU law in an English court and, if I win and he doesn't pay up, I can have the judgement enforced by arrangement with his local court. I'll tell you in six months whether it works! But I have fought for English jurisdiction in my case and I have got it. The trial is fixed for next January. I am working on amended Particulars for my claim at present and the DSR is one I'd like to cite...
oh right. In which case, i would presume that the fulfilment of the contract is when the car is delivered to you - after all, if it was when you paid, then he could very easily just not send you the car but still say "i fulfillled my part of the contract by accepting payment" I have no basis in law for this, but it's what common sense is telling me.
i would have thought that you would have a right to inspect the car, and then accept or reject it immediately (so for example, you couldn't drive it for 3 weeks and then reject it wth no grounds) However, if you are rejecting it for no reason i would havethought you would have to bear the delivery costs..
All of the above is just what i would think though, not sure if it's right.
i had a friend who bought a van on ebay, paid, went to pick it up and it broke down about a mile away from the persons house. He immediately went back to them and rejected the vehicle because of this, but they refused to refund his money. The friend took him to court, but lost.
i would have thought that you would have a right to inspect the car, and then accept or reject it immediately (so for example, you couldn't drive it for 3 weeks and then reject it wth no grounds) However, if you are rejecting it for no reason i would havethought you would have to bear the delivery costs..
All of the above is just what i would think though, not sure if it's right.
i had a friend who bought a van on ebay, paid, went to pick it up and it broke down about a mile away from the persons house. He immediately went back to them and rejected the vehicle because of this, but they refused to refund his money. The friend took him to court, but lost.
Hi,
Thanks for your response. I now understand that the contract is concluded (the bit I was concerned about) when you enter into it. Sounds strange but, that's what a lawyer has told me. It's good news for me because it opens up another series of infringements for me to allege e.g. he did not post a warning that I (customer) had right of cancellation; did not respect my decision to do so when I rejected it within 16 hours! ; did not allow me a 7-day cooling off period (longer actually because if a seller doesn't provide warning of cancellation, cooling off period is extended to 3 months); didn't refund me within 30 days; must cover expenses of collecting the car; and I didn't have to justify my rejection with any reason. Bearing in mind that I am throwing Sale of Goods Act and Misrepresentation Act at him as well, I think he might as well settle up NOW out of court. Having said that, litigation is a lottery and goodness knows whether justic ewill be done (sadly). Hope the above is of interest. Bryn.
Thanks for your response. I now understand that the contract is concluded (the bit I was concerned about) when you enter into it. Sounds strange but, that's what a lawyer has told me. It's good news for me because it opens up another series of infringements for me to allege e.g. he did not post a warning that I (customer) had right of cancellation; did not respect my decision to do so when I rejected it within 16 hours! ; did not allow me a 7-day cooling off period (longer actually because if a seller doesn't provide warning of cancellation, cooling off period is extended to 3 months); didn't refund me within 30 days; must cover expenses of collecting the car; and I didn't have to justify my rejection with any reason. Bearing in mind that I am throwing Sale of Goods Act and Misrepresentation Act at him as well, I think he might as well settle up NOW out of court. Having said that, litigation is a lottery and goodness knows whether justic ewill be done (sadly). Hope the above is of interest. Bryn.
This may help you:http://www.clarkslegal.com/OurServices/Motorse ctor/Factsheets/Distancesellingregulations/tab id/579/Default.aspx
Just a thought that occurred to me- you did buy this in your personal name didn't you (as opposed to a company car).
Just a thought that occurred to me- you did buy this in your personal name didn't you (as opposed to a company car).
Thanks for the fact sheet; it confirms what I have learned of this law. Yes, I am a private customer (for a vintage car) and the other party is a specialist dealer whose advertising says he sources and supplies such cars "without the customer leaving his home" (which is a pretty clear 'admission' of distance selling! ) Since I paid remotely and received a Bill of Sale by Email all prior to taking the goods, I think it fair to say that the contract was well and truly concluded in a manner that meets the criteria. I had been concerned that the definition of conclusion of contract was "performance of contract" and it might be argued that this was the point of delivery -- where there was face-to-face contact - thus diluting my case for the Claim falling within Distance Selling. I am now satisfied that my argument holds water and I was entitled to reject the goods which is what I tried to do the day after receiving them. The dealer should have agreed - and paid - a refund within 30 days. Thanks for your help with that link. Cheers, Bryn.