+1. There are a lot of homeowners who would love to be in your position!
Your rights will never go beyond what you pay.
They were offering you the larger size at a discount. It would be the same as buying "2 for the price of 1 baked beans" and trying to return both cans at full price.
For the life of me I cant see my case being the same as this beans situation. In my mind I entered into a contract for a larger item and as they cant fulfill it, surely I should get the value of this larger item. If I bought the two tins for beans for a price I would only expect to get the same price back.
HOWEVER
Rang consumerconnect, looks like you guys all are right.
I feel Iv been treated poorly by the shop and now after weeks of hassle/waiting am back to my original sum of cash in my hand and will have to go to another shop to purchase and pay extra to get the larger item and wait again.
I think OP tries to make that case in the last post - "compensation" - the expectation that there was an entitlement to a refund of the price paid plus some "hassle money", reading between the lines.Why would any business refund you more than you paid ... .
I think OP tries to make that case in the last post - "compensation" - the expectation that there was an entitlement to a refund of the price paid plus some "hassle money", reading between the lines.
I cant understand why no-one here sees I am at a loss. I was offered a more expensive item for the monies paid but shop now pulling out of the deal after considerably effort on my side, all for nothing. Financially I will be at the loss of the difference between the two items. But as I said Ill just have to move on. Thanks for all the comments.
I purchased an item for €X. Delivery date missed (no contact etc). I demanded my money back.
My item came in a larger size which shop agreed to give me instead of losing my money paid. Initially they asked for more money but I again demanded my money back but was won over by the new offer.
.
The point I get from Sandals posts is that they paid €x for the original item which the shop failed to deliver on. The shop then offered to supply the larger item (worth €y), so the contract was now for the new item. The shop also failed to deliver the larger item, so they are now looking to be compensated for the loss of the larger item - to the value of €y
I see the logic *to a degree* but I think the bit that's missing is that the new contract was essentially -
exchange €x for the larger item plus a certain value in goodwill which the shop was willing to spend
When this contract wasn't completed, the shop refunded €x and essentially took back (lost) the goodwill value.
At the end of the day, the shop wouldn't be liable to refund more than was paid unless I'm missing something very significant.
z
I cant understand why no-one here sees I am at a loss. I was offered a more expensive item for the monies paid but shop now pulling out of the deal after considerably effort on my side, all for nothing. Financially I will be at the loss of the difference between the two items. But as I said Ill just have to move on. Thanks for all the comments.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?