Customer wins Court Case Against B&Q due to £89 Dishwasher order not being honoured - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Customer wins Court Case Against B&Q due to £89 Dishwasher order not being honoured

£0.00 @
I don't speak legalese so if anyone wants to correct or adjust my summary, please feel free. As I understand it as B&Q accepted and processed his order and because B&Q had unfair contract terms (be…
schizoboy Avatar
7y, 8m agoPosted 7 years, 8 months ago
I don't speak legalese so if anyone wants to correct or adjust my summary, please feel free.

As I understand it as B&Q accepted and processed his order and because B&Q had unfair contract terms (being that they can supply at their discretion without a single consideration for the consumer) but they wouldn't honour it, they admited in court they allowed all these orders to be initialy processed despite only having 7 in stock and with no future stock forth coming.

So their terms being at their discretion was utterly false as they had no intention of fulfilling those orders.

Essentially it's fraud despite nothing being charged it seems, if they couldn;'t fulful those orders they had no business initially promising the product would be ordered and delivered to them and as such they breached their initial contractual obligations under contractual law and the sale goods act.

If I could be arsed I would contract Amazon UK and ask for my £70 360 Elite to be delivered now :)

Retailers should take note I think, do not advertise what you cannot deliver upon, or essentially all those nice automated customer check out systems you have are enabling you to essentially break the law each time you don't.
schizoboy Avatar
7y, 8m agoPosted 7 years, 8 months ago
Options

All Comments

(4) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#2
This has always been the case, but UK consumers are unaware of their rights, and even if they know them, do not like to "Make a fuss".

The S.O.G.A and UTCCR's gives us blanket coverage, I doubt that any country in the world has better consumer rights. :)
#3
damn, so when panasonic had all their Tv's etc at 0.01 I should have sued?

:oops::whistling::p:?:roll::)
#4
l33t-krew;5496044
damn, so when panasonic had all their Tv's etc at 0.01 I should have sued?

:oops::whistling::p:?:roll::)


£89 is a plausible/providable price point though which Contract Law and Sales of Goods Act can uphold which the judge obviously agreed with.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Looking for Twitter login?
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!