B2B refund dispute
started this topic @ 20:11 on 08/08/2012
Interesting or important topic? Please click "vote topic higher" if you think so.
I'd like some advice regarding some issues I'm having with a supplier.
I arranged to buy 2 reconditioned gym machines from a company that specialises in the sale of such machines.
These machines were sold to me as "reconditioned", the company director, emailed me to say that the following work was undertaken on each machine prior to delivery:
1). all equipment is fully serviced and where components require replacing,
they are replaced.
2). all cables, pulleys, bearings, pillow block ends are checked
3). the refurbishment process involves stripping the machines down to re-paint/polish etc so during this process all components not up to standard are replaced with Life Fitness parts only (no substitutions from other makes).
The machines that were delivered to me did not match the above description.
Both machines showed significant amounts of rust. As such, I refused to sign for the machines as they were not up to standard.
The company director wanted me to retain the machines at my premises until she was able to despatch somebody to undertake the necessary work on site.
My argument is that the necessary work should have been undertaken prior to the machines being delivered. I think she is using this as an excuse to retain part of my deposit payment. Why should I have to incur the cost of her delivering 2 machines that were not up to standard?
For the machines to be properly processed, the rust first needed to be properly removed with a grinder.
Rust will weaken the metal. If there is rust on the outside of the frame as well as inside of the frame it doesn't take a scientist to understand that the strength of the machine will be significantly impaired. The Life Fitness Pro Series box section framework is only 3mm thick.
It is my belief that the necessary work needed to be undertaken at her premises - presumably a suitable manufacturing facility - to make sure the rust and the rust removal process had not weakened the frame.
The company director has not disputed any of these issues. In fact, she has accepted all of these issues in writing.
When the machines had been returned to the supplier's premises, the company director emailed me to say that she could not deliver replacement machines for 6 weeks.
I initially paid a 50% deposit to the supplier prior to delivery. I was not prepared to wait a further 6 weeks (which could easily become 8 weeks or more) so I requested a refund.
Because I had refused to have one of her employees work on the machines at my premises for the reasons above, she wants to deduct a £100 delivery cost from my refund.
Where do I stand legally?
+ Post Reply
RE: B2B refund dispute
| 21/08/2012 11:34 PM
Did you sign an agreement with this company?