| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
peterc10
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Aug 21, 2005
Posts: 1761
Location: Kent, England
|
 Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 11:19 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| PatC wrote: | | peterc10 wrote: | The legal position is clear. Your remedy is against the supplier not the manufacturer.
The goods have to be of "satisfactory quality" |
It is clear in terms of the supplier being responsible, yes. But I can't help thinking there is a conflict between legal clarity and the use of the words "satisfactory" and "reasonable" in the Sale of Goods Act.
Having said that, the lack of street level mapping that was raised here sounds to me like one of the clearer cases. |
The Act does not use the term "reasonable" when referring to the goods. It only uses the term when describing a "reasonable person".
Section 2B of the Act helps when deciding what to take into account when decising what a reasonable person would take into account when decising if the goods are satisfactory. Specifically (a) states "fitness for all purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied".
_________________
Peter
HTC Sensation
Sygic GPS for Europe (No more TT "support"!)
Copilot for USA
Bury CC9060 bluetooth car kit & Brodit mount |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
neil01
Frequent Visitor
Joined: May 06, 2005
Posts: 902
Location: Leeds
|
| Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone may say what they believe the act means, and that because of the act the retailer must do what what they think the act says. But unfortunately no person can make someone do something because of the act - only a court can.
Yes having the act behind you can influence the retailers actions - after all, if you sucessfully take them to court, they would normally pick up the bill for your costs too - so it makes sense for them to deal in accordance with the act where the result is clear cut.
Unfortunately, any words will be interpreted by the courts not by us - so the legal meaning may not be as you wish - in which case you could end up paying the retailers legal costs too.
Take for example 'Complete Maps of Western Europe' - does it mean that is has maps of All of Western Europe, or All the Available maps for Western Europe. If Complete means you have the 'Full set' does it also mean that each map contain all the roads?
- I am not jsutifying it or even giving an answer, simply that there are possibilities which a court may decide upon which may noy be in your favour.
However, taking another example, if you go into a shop and say that you need a product for a particular purpose (ie to navigate to an Aunt who lives in the back of beyond in the ROI) and they suggest something, or say that the product you would like is suitable - then it doesn't matter what is on the product box if it fails to perform. That is assuming that you can prove what was claimed by the retailer to the level the court requires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PatC
Regular Visitor
Joined: Apr 29, 2006
Posts: 179
Location: Reading, UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| neil01 wrote: | Unfortunately, any words will be interpreted by the courts not by us - so the legal meaning may not be as you wish - in which case you could end up paying the retailers legal costs too.
|
Indeed, hence the extremely limited value of words like reasonable and satisfactory in legal terms.
I believe that most well-known retailers will respond favourably to a reasonable complaint, and often exceed their statutory obligations to maintain their reputation. I also know from experience that this certainly isn't always the case with online retailers.
Both of them know perfectly well that most people are not going to initiate legal proceedings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PatC wrote: | | Indeed, hence the extremely limited value of words like reasonable and satisfactory in legal terms. |
The sale of goods act requires that the goods are "as described" and this is the basis of a customer's case against the retailer because TomTom doesn't sell complete maps of Western Europe as they claim.
I dont' think that the requirement that the goods be of satisfactory quality or reasonably durable isn't really relevent to this case.
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PatC
Regular Visitor
Joined: Apr 29, 2006
Posts: 179
Location: Reading, UK
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: | The sale of goods act requires that the goods are "as described" and this is the basis of a customer's case against the retailer because TomTom doesn't sell complete maps of Western Europe as they claim.
|
I agree. What I originally questioned was whether UK Trading Standards could act based on a web site description which was nothing to do with any retailer. But I agree that the wording on the box is misleading, and that should be entitlement to a refund if anyone so chooses.
And in relation to the original point I have noticed that TomTom do specifically note that the Channel Islands (and the IOM) are excluded from the GB map in the map download section of their web site - but not in the main *10 product descriptions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neil01
Frequent Visitor
Joined: May 06, 2005
Posts: 902
Location: Leeds
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: | ..The sale of goods act requires that the goods are "as described" and this is the basis of a customer's case against the retailer because TomTom doesn't sell complete maps of Western Europe as they claim.
I dont' think that the requirement that the goods be of satisfactory quality or reasonably durable isn't really relevent to this case. |
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your assertion of the contents of the law you quote. It is simply the 'interpretation of that law by the courts' which is under question.
There is a problem, as you have noted, is with the words reasonable and satisfactory. This becomes more of a problem to the consumer when they purchase a product such as software, where it is accepted that it can never be 100% perfect. Yes it may turn out that you have a particular (and unusual) set of circumstances which mean that the product is of no use whatsoever for you, yet it will have no impact on the vast majority of users. In this case, unless you defined your requirements before purchase, so that they effectively became part of the contract with the retailer, you can end up with a product which is of no use, yet still have no legal remedy.
As to 'as described' again this is another situation where it would have to be decided by the courts and their interpretation (not ours). I did mention about the potential diferences in interpretation of 'complete' in an earlier post with suggestions of 'alternative meanings'. When this is further qualified with the additional description of certain regions being 'full coverage' it could possibly be argued that in this case 'complete' and 'full' have diferrent meaings ie 'complete coverage' is not 'full coverage'.
Again, I am not saying that in no way would it be interpreted as you obviously think it should be - just that once again the only interpretation which can be enforced is that of the courts, and that the courts decision cannot be predicted with 100% certainty.
We also have a further complication, in that being a civil matter, you would in all probability have to fund it yourself, with the unfortunate problem that even if you won initially, the looser could simply appeal the decision in a higher (and more costly) court. It is highly likely that the 'big' company could afford to keep going longer than you could, with the consequence that even though you had won in the lower court, simply due to the costs involved you may be unable to continue and have to withdraw. Not only would this then mean that you have now lost (in that because you have failed to challenge the appeal, they are deemed to have won the appeal) you will be responsible for their costs too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterc10
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Aug 21, 2005
Posts: 1761
Location: Kent, England
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| neil01 wrote: | Unfortunately, any words will be interpreted by the courts not by us - so the legal meaning may not be as you wish - in which case you could end up paying the retailers legal costs too.
Take for example 'Complete Maps of Western Europe' - does it mean that is has maps of All of Western Europe, or All the Available maps for Western Europe. If Complete means you have the 'Full set' does it also mean that each map contain all the roads?
- I am not jsutifying it or even giving an answer, simply that there are possibilities which a court may decide upon which may noy be in your favour.
. |
Claims below £5000 go through the small court procedures in England & Wales (limit is different in Scotland). Costs will not normally be awarded except in exceptional circumstances and even then very rarely against a consumer. You can now even file a claim online at https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco/index.jsp
Various Regulations favour the consumer over the seller - too many to list. In any event if there is any doubt about the meaning of words, i.e. they can have one of two logical meanings, the "contra preferentum" rule will normally mean it will be interpreted against the person putting those words forward, in this case the seller.
I agree that court should be the last option but if all else fails it is a lot less painless and risky than before - nowadays the most you risk is the cost of issuing the claim and your own time (and any money you spend) pursuing it.
_________________
Peter
HTC Sensation
Sygic GPS for Europe (No more TT "support"!)
Copilot for USA
Bury CC9060 bluetooth car kit & Brodit mount |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neil01
Frequent Visitor
Joined: May 06, 2005
Posts: 902
Location: Leeds
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| peterc10 wrote: | | ...Claims below £5000 go through the small court procedures in England & Wales (limit is different in Scotland). Costs will not normally be awarded except in exceptional circumstances and even then very rarely against a consumer... |
While I agree that the costs involved for the individual to take the initial steps may be small, and on the surface worth the risk, I still wonder what the consequences would be if the judgement were appealed. After all, I would be suprised if it were left at the small court procudures if the case was lost, because it would mean that they could end refunding in far too many cases, with serious consequences to the company itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my experience it would be unusual for the case to go all the way to court.
Send them a letter by recorded delivery setting out your case and giving them 14 days to come up with a solution. If they can't then you take the matter to trading standards and see if they agree that you have a case.
As a last resort and with the backing of Trading Standards, you can take the case to the small claims court.
Generally the retailer will give in and resolve the dispute to maintain their goodwill. They certainly don't want to go to court over a fairly minor dispute.
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PatC
Regular Visitor
Joined: Apr 29, 2006
Posts: 179
Location: Reading, UK
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: | In my experience it would be unusual for the case to go all the way to court.
Send them a letter by recorded delivery setting out your case and giving them 14 days to come up with a solution. |
I'm sure that is true, although a letter from a solicitor is far more likely to have the desired effect.
And even if they do go to court they don't always get to the hearing. I was told by a lawyer representing me in a small claims case that they are often resolved between the two parties in the court waiting area - although this wasn't true in my case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterc10
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Aug 21, 2005
Posts: 1761
Location: Kent, England
|
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| neil01 wrote: | | While I agree that the costs involved for the individual to take the initial steps may be small, and on the surface worth the risk, I still wonder what the consequences would be if the judgement were appealed. After all, I would be suprised if it were left at the small court procudures if the case was lost, because it would mean that they could end refunding in far too many cases, with serious consequences to the company itself. |
Difficult if not impossible to get permission to appeal a small claims court decision. Has to be on a dispute as to the law (not fact) and most judges make sure they don't decide the case on the law - just the facts. In any event small claims court decisions are not binding on any courts, even other small claims courts. Really is not worth worrying about. I would be interested to hear from anybody that has a small claims court decision appealed, successful or otherwise
_________________
Peter
HTC Sensation
Sygic GPS for Europe (No more TT "support"!)
Copilot for USA
Bury CC9060 bluetooth car kit & Brodit mount |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris32
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jan 03, 2006
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It seems only fair to let you see this response that I received from Tom Tom a couple of days ago.
We sincerely apologize for the miscommunication. The Channel Islands have not been included into our maps of Europe database due to the fact that our map data supplier TeleAtlas does not have these in its possession. This information is indeed not made clear on our website and has been escalated to our content manager for further scrutiny.
Our prior response is therefore not of relevance. Due to having misinformed you we feel obliged to provide you with some form of compensation. This you could translate into a one-year Plus Service subscription of your choice. We kindly refer you to our website:
http://www.tomtom.com/plus/index.php?Language=1
for a list of these Plus Services. Despite the fact that the map data for the Channel Islands is not included in your device we do hope you can come to enjoy the use of the product and its various possibilities.
With kind regards,
Dante Pereira Passaro
TomTom Customer Relations Dept. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mullet
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Dec 12, 2005
Posts: 1051
|
| Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was wondering where the Channel Islands had gone. They had the map data in the older standalone v563 map. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomTom Customer Relations Dept. wrote: | | We sincerely apologize for the miscommunication. .... we feel obliged to provide you with some form of compensation. |
That's nice of them. A bit of good customer service goes a long way.
Hopefully they will have a look at their description of the product and consider describing it a bit more accurately...
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HappyTrucker
Regular Visitor
Joined: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 96
Location: Bolton,UK
|
| Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not that it bothers me TOO much, but Eire is also absent. Since its currency is the Euro, it's definitely part of Europe - but lacking from TT's Europe maps. Probably a TeleAtlas shortcoming like the Channel Islands. Wonder if they'll ever be included - and at a reasonable (or even free) price? I know - don't hold my breath.
Still a bit odd I can use a UK bought TT to take me from Bellingham, Washington to Daytona Beach, Florida but not from Manchester to Dublin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![]() Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
