'No Returns' Query

bkehoe

Hi all,
I'm just looking for some advice on behalf of my parents who purchased a new mattress that was on sale in a fairly well known furniture store and upon delivery have noticed a major issue with it.

In the store items were marked as 'Sold As Seen, No Refunds or Returns' and they did have a good look at the mattress and didn't notice any obvious problems. They were happy to accept that it may have a few scuffs or marks and that was why it was in the 'sale' section. The presentation of the item in the store at the time meant it was difficult to inspect the underside (it was on a made-up bed on display) and they could only inspect the upper side and that appeared fine.

It was delivered yesterday and this morning, having removed it from the packing, when inspecting it they discovered that on one side there are huge stains covering approx half the mattress with what is unmistakeably urine. This isn't just a small patch, it's very obvious and smells really badly. Obviously they now have absolutely no intention of even considering using the mattress or cleaning it as the urine would have soaked all the way into it.

They accept that they didn't thoroughly inspect it, but in fairness who would expect to buy a mattress in a shop and expect it to be covered in and to stink of urine? In addition to being unpleasant it's also a health risk, and who knows what kind of creature did this - if something could do this, who's to say there weren't rats or vermin also joining in?

So they are of course going to go back to the store tomorrow morning but I wanted to find out what rights they have, if any, so that they are prepared when they speak to the manager?

Thanks,
Brendan

clarke1991

these mighy help, probably not open till tomorrow tho.
http://www.consumerassociation.ie/

sunnysoutheast

I think your parents would have their usual statutory consumer rights even though the item was in a sale. The price reduction would reflect any pre-existing damage.

Are you sure you got the correct mattress delivered to you, wondering if this one was picked up from a storeroom and nobody noticed. Damp can often smell like urine. would be a dead giveaway if the demo bed was still there!

Good luck with it.

SSE

bkehoe

Thanks for the replies so far.

Hmm, would damp also have a yellow colour? It really is a very strong urine type smell, not the kind of dampness smells I've got from other things.

jor el

Sale makes no difference, and a shop cannot make you waive your rights no matter what a sign says. If the item is not fit for purpose, then they must offer to do something about it.

Have they gone back into the shop yet? They should ask for the manager and explain the situation to him. No shop should be selling a mattress that has urine on it, it would probably be a health and safety risk, and probably very illegal for them to sell it.

FortyPlusHubby

bkehoe wrote: »

In the store items were marked as 'Sold As Seen, No Refunds or Returns' and they did have a good look at the mattress and didn't notice any obvious problems. They were happy to accept that it may have a few scuffs or marks and that was why it was in the 'sale' section. The presentation of the item in the store at the time meant it was difficult to inspect the underside (it was on a made-up bed on display) and they could only inspect the upper side and that appeared fine.

I'm pretty sure that if they could only see the upper side the store would accept this and refund their money. If it really is urine the store certainly won't want that story getting out.

Cheers

91011

jor el wrote: »

Sale makes no difference, and a shop cannot make you waive your rights no matter what a sign says. If the item is not fit for purpose, then they must offer to do something about it.

Have they gone back into the shop yet? They should ask for the manager and explain the situation to him. No shop should be selling a mattress that has urine on it, it would probably be a health and safety risk, and probably very illegal for them to sell it.

In this case it was "sold as seen" so in effect the shop was bringing attention to the purchaser that there was a fault with the mattress. Therefore by purchasing the item you are doing so in the knowledge that there is a fault and as such the normal sale rights do not apply.

However, if the purchaser asked what the fault was and attention was not brought to the stain, then they probably have comeback.

mdebets

91011 wrote: »

In this case it was "sold as seen" so in effect the shop was bringing attention to the purchaser that there was a fault with the mattress. Therefore by purchasing the item you are doing so in the knowledge that there is a fault and as such the normal sale rights do not apply.

Do you have any legislation to back this up?

91011

mdebets wrote: »

Do you have any legislation to back this up?

I'm not going to go searching, but I'm sure its available on the consumer association website.

The shop sold the item, mentioned that it was faulty, the customer bought it in full knowledge that it had a fault of some kind therefore it cannot be returned becasue of the fault that had been brought to the customers attaention.

If however the customer was only told that it had a few scuffs and the real fault was hidden THEN they would have a case.


a quick google search -
from citizensinformation.ie

"You have no grounds for redress if

You were told about the defect before you bought the item (for example, if the goods were marked 'shopsoiled')
You examined the item before you bought it and should have seen the defect
You bought the item knowing that it wasn’t fit for what you wanted it to do
You broke or damaged the product
You made a mistake when buying the item (for example, if you bought an item of clothing thinking it was black when it is actually navy)
You change your mind "

Absolam

If the only information offered was 'Sold as seen' I would think the store did not draw attention to any defect, nor did they mention that it was faulty. Since the customer (presumably) didn't see the large urine stain, and their attention wasn't directed to it by the seller, then they would be entitled to reject the goods as unfit.

bugler

"Sold as Smelled" might have been more appropriate in this case.

A urine stained mattress is not fit for purpose, IMO, and I would trust that would be the opinion of any impartial adjudicator. As Citizen's Information points out "It is important to note that there are no hard and fast rules as to which remedy you should be entitled to. When seeking redress for problems with goods or services the circumstances of each individual case must be taken into account."

There are two opposing facts here: The goods were clearly marked as imperfect in some way vs. It's piss. On a mattress.

If the shop are offering no remedy, I'd lodge the Small Claims Court complaint.

mdebets

91011 wrote: »

I'm not going to go searching, but I'm sure its available on the consumer association website.

The shop sold the item, mentioned that it was faulty, the customer bought it in full knowledge that it had a fault of some kind therefore it cannot be returned becasue of the fault that had been brought to the customers attaention.

If however the customer was only told that it had a few scuffs and the real fault was hidden THEN they would have a case.


a quick google search -
from citizensinformation.ie

"You have no grounds for redress if

You were told about the defect before you bought the item (for example, if the goods were marked 'shopsoiled')
You examined the item before you bought it and should have seen the defect
You bought the item knowing that it wasn’t fit for what you wanted it to do
You broke or damaged the product
You made a mistake when buying the item (for example, if you bought an item of clothing thinking it was black when it is actually navy)
You change your mind "

While you're right with the law, I think you're wrong with your interpretation.

The law states as follows:

SALE OF GOODS AND SUPPLY OF SERVICES ACT, 1980, PART II wrote:

(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract are of merchantable quality, except that there is no such condition—

( a ) as regards defects specifically drawn to the buyer's attention before the contract is made, or

( b ) if the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, as regards defects which that examination ought to have revealed.

In regard to section (a), a mere 'Bought as Seen' should not be enough, but the specific defects need to be mentioned, which the shop didn't do.

In regard to section (b) are two possibilities. It's either the mattress the parents inspected, so it wouldn't apply, as they couldn't inspect the underside in the shop. Or it's a different mattress (what I would suspect, as the parents should have smelled the urine in the shop if it is that strong). In this case, it applies neither, as they didn't inspect the mattress.

So the parents of the OT should be able to return the mattress.

P. Breathnach

Absolam wrote: »

If the only information offered was 'Sold as seen' I would think the store did not draw attention to any defect, nor did they mention that it was faulty.

I think it is widely understood (including by the courts) that "sold as seen" means that there is a defect and that potential purchasers are invited to look for the defect and make a judgement on how tolerable it is.

Since the customer (presumably) didn't see the large urine stain, and their attention wasn't directed to it by the seller, then they would be entitled to reject the goods as unfit.

I think that shifts the onus on to the seller after the seller has already given notice that there is a defect. The only out I can visualise is if the buyer pointed to scuff-marks or the like and asked clearly "is that the extent of the defect?".

royston_vasey

Originally Posted by SALE OF GOODS AND SUPPLY OF SERVICES ACT, 1980, PART II
(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract are of merchantable quality, except that there is no such condition—

Obviously if the matress is damp it cannot be of merchantable quality regardless of whether it was full price or sale price. As others have pointed out the "fitness for purpose" test would also be failed for the same reason.

P. Breathnach

mdebets wrote: »

...
In regard to section (b) are two possibilities. It's either the mattress the parents inspected, so it wouldn't apply, as they couldn't inspect the underside in the shop. Or it's a different mattress (what I would suspect, as the parents should have smelled the urine in the shop if it is that strong). In this case, it applies neither, as they didn't inspect the mattress.

So the parents of the OT should be able to return the mattress.

Come off it! "Sold as seen" has a meaning, and "I didn't bother looking" is hardly an adequate response.

It's a bit OTT to suggest a substitution by the seller.

royston_vasey

91011 wrote: »

I'm not going to go searching, but I'm sure its available on the consumer association website.

The shop sold the item, mentioned that it was faulty, the customer bought it in full knowledge that it had a fault of some kind therefore it cannot be returned becasue of the fault that had been brought to the customers attaention.

If however the customer was only told that it had a few scuffs and the real fault was hidden THEN they would have a case.


a quick google search -
from citizensinformation.ie

"You have no grounds for redress if

You were told about the defect before you bought the item (for example, if the goods were marked 'shopsoiled')
You examined the item before you bought it and should have seen the defect
You bought the item knowing that it wasn’t fit for what you wanted it to do
You broke or damaged the product
You made a mistake when buying the item (for example, if you bought an item of clothing thinking it was black when it is actually navy)
You change your mind "

Are you a retailer???

pleasant Co.

royston_vasey wrote: »

Are you a retailer???

Would that matter either way?

bkehoe

Just to update people... First of all the reason they didn't see the urine in the shop was because it was part of a display with sheets, pillows, etc on it. And upon delivery it had been wrapped up in plastic.
But anyway, the mattress was exchanged without issue from the retailer. They claimed it must have been a second-hand item that they took to dispose of from someone else and it accidentally made it out onto the displays rather than being destroyed! Quite how this managed to happen or how the person who made up the display didn't see the urine is hard to understand but the important thing is there was absolutely no difficulty in my parents picking a different one for the same price.

sunnysoutheast

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Come off it! "Sold as seen" has a meaning, and "I didn't bother looking" is hardly an adequate response.

It's a bit OTT to suggest a substitution by the seller.

Glad to see that the OP got this sorted, but I don't agree with your logic in this case. For starters, I doubt the shop would welcome the OP's parents taking their display apart to check underneath, and I doubt any court would accept as reasonable urine contamination on an ex-display mattress despite it being flagged "sold as seen".

SSE

delllat

"sold as seen" usually means exactly that

no comebacks

no warrarantys

no replacements

no repairs etc

thats why these things are often half price or less

91011

delllat wrote: »

"sold as seen" usually means exactly that

no comebacks

no warrarantys

no replacements

no repairs etc

thats why these things are often half price or less

Not necessarily - the fault / defect has to be shown, mentioned or be blatantly obvious. In the OP case, the store themselves assumed that the only problems were scuff marks and had not seen the urine (could have been from a cat, other store visitor's child, returned item etc etc.) and as this fault had not been seen or pointed out to the purchaser then the store does have responsibilities for rectifying the probelm which it did without hassle.

Yes I do have an interest in retail - is there a law against that? And the business I have involvement with has a 100% customer satisfaction policy even if it mean a few scumbags take advantage of it.

delllat

91011 wrote: »

Not necessarily - the fault / defect has to be shown, mentioned or be blatantly obvious. In the OP case, the store themselves assumed that the only problems were scuff marks and had not seen the urine (could have been from a cat, other store visitor's child, returned item etc etc.) and as this fault had not been seen or pointed out to the purchaser then the store does have responsibilities for rectifying the probelm which it did without hassle.

Yes I do have an interest in retail - is there a law against that? And the business I have involvement with has a 100% customer satisfaction policy even if it mean a few scumbags take advantage of it.

u like working in argos ?

91011

delllat wrote: »

u like working in argos ?

imo Argos are the most overpriced rip off retailer in Ireland.

dudara

delllat wrote: »

u like working in argos ?

royston_vasey wrote: »

Are you a retailer???

Comments like these don't add any value to this forum and are unhelpful.

Please think before posting.

dudara

Absolam

delllat wrote: »

"sold as seen" usually means exactly that

no comebacks

no warrarantys

no replacements

no repairs etc

thats why these things are often half price or less

Then that would be an illegal condition; the seller cannot limit the legal rights of the purchaser, in your example the right to the warranty that the goods are saleable as expressed in the Sale of Goods Act. Even if the goods are 'shop soiled' which was not expressed, they would have to be merchantable and fit for purpose. The purchaser always has a comeback under the Act, a warranty which requires repair replacement or refund if the goods are not merchantable, fit for the purpose described, or faulty. If the seller had described the mattress as urine soiled, or drawn attention to the stain, that would be different. But "Sold as Seen" does not draw attention to the defect.

delllat

the term "sold as seen" is generally used for sellling items with something wrong with them

whenever you see a sign like that on something its very wise to inspect the item before paying for it

the deal means ,u buy it as it is

flawed or whatever

the whole "fit for purpose" thing doesnt apply if you didnt give them your reason for purchasing at time of purchase

pleasant Co.

delllat wrote: »

the whole "fit for purpose" thing doesnt apply if you didnt give them your reason for purchasing at time of purchase

Interesting, is that written in law somewhere?

delllat

people buy things for differnt purposes,i think in this case we have already established nobodys going to want to sleep on a mattress covered in piss :rolleyes:

but if it was a 1997 ford fiesta ...........fit for purpose would come into play if you told the dealer u need a car that will last 6 months doing 100 miles a day and he told you it would be "fit for that purpose"

and then the engine blew after 3 weeeks

the car "wasnt fit for the purpose " so in my estimation you would be entitled to repair ,repllacement,refund IN THAT CASE

if the car said "sold as seen" and u just bought it without saying anything to the guy i doubt they would have any responsibility towards it if the engine blew after 3 weeks

its a bit of a grey area esp where verbal contracts are concerned

you could say he did say it ,he could deny saying it

best get these things onto a piece of paper when buying to save aggro later

pleasant Co.

Thanks for replying but I am more interested in the specific legally binding aspect of what you mentioned earlier:

delllat wrote:

the whole "fit for purpose" thing doesnt apply if you didnt give them your reason for purchasing at time of purchase

Just for fact-checking sake as I hadn't heard this one before.

delllat

Mactard wrote: »

Thanks for replying but I am more interested in the specific legally binding aspect of what you mentioned earlier:



Just for fact-checking sake as I hadn't heard this one before.

probably depends on the vendor to a certain extent
not many companies even use the term(maybe theres a reason for this ?)

my interpretation (which could be wrong) of "sold as seen" was a cash transaction with no come backs as the item is obviously flawed or damaged in some way and them wanting to get rid of it cheap with no comebacks

hence being "sold as seen "

in court you would probably win as a judge would usually favour a customer over a dodgy business

if you bought it from a private seller i doubt there would be any comebacks

there is a lot of mixed opinions on this thread about this exact subject :

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1838269

Absolam

delllat wrote: »

probably depends on the vendor to a certain extent
not many companies even use the term(maybe theres a reason for this ?)

my interpretation (which could be wrong) of "sold as seen" was a cash transaction with no come backs as the item is obviously flawed or damaged in some way and them wanting to get rid of it cheap with no comebacks

hence being "sold as seen "

in court you would probably win as a judge would usually favour a customer over a dodgy business

if you bought it from a private seller i doubt there would be any comebacks

there is a lot of mixed opinions on this thread about this exact subject :

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1838269

I should think not may companies use the phrase as they know they can't limit a buyers rights; fit for purpose always applies as it's a legal requisite.