Wiggle - anyone got a telno for them?



P

Pete Biggs

Guest
Chris Hills wrote:
> Pete Biggs wrote:
>> It is not the retailer's duty to ensure the goods arrive. The goods
>> legally become the buyer's property the moment they are posted.
>> It's about "transfer of title", iirc.

>
> Wrong, it is the responsibility of the seller to ensure the goods are
> received. Ask a solicitor, or look on the DTI website.


OK, this info on the Trading Standards site contradicts what I said:

"OTHER LEGISLATION AFFECTING CONSUMER CONTRACTS
Loss or damage in transit

If the trader arranges for goods to be delivered to a consumer, the goods
remain at the trader's risk until delivery. It is, therefore, the trader's
responsibility to ensure that goods are not lost or damaged in transit,
and/or to take out appropriate insurance. It follows that optional postal
insurance should never be offered to consumers."


> What on earth made you think that?


Some interpretation of the Sale of Goods Act.

Perhaps it was this bit (?):

"18......


Rule 1.-Where there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific
goods in a deliverable state the property in the goods passes to the buyer
when the contract is made, and it is immaterial whether the time of payment
or the time of delivery, or both, be postponed. "


~PB
 
P

Pete Biggs

Guest
Simon Brooke wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Pete Biggs
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> It is not the retailer's duty to ensure the goods arrive. The goods
>> legally
>> become the buyer's property the moment they are posted. It's about
>> "transfer of title", iirc.
>>
>> The only question is whether ordinary First Class was a reasonable
>> service
>> to use for this order. I'm not sure, but I can't think it makes much
>> difference as stuff shouldn't be left outside the property even when
>> it's not Recorded, or "Signed For" as it's now called.

>
> If, as the OP says, he 'paid for priority dispatch', then quality of
> delivery service becomes part of the contract, I would have thought.


Please see my later posts. I think I'm wrong about when the seller's duty
ends after being badly misinformed by amateur lawyers!

According to TS, it's the seller's duty to make sure the goods are
delivered, full stop. So the particular postal service is irrelevant to the
buyer. Pigeon carrier would be fine as long as the pigeons do a proper job.

~PB
 
I

iarocu

Guest
On 2 Mar, 21:29, Rola <[email protected]> wrote:


> Thanks for all the tips so far - will keep you posted. I see that they
> have updated the web page design - maybe everyone in the office has been
> tied up with that and I'm being ignored for a reason :)



I had an item from Wiggle fail to appear just before christmas. Again
sent by 1st class mail. I e-mailed them and got the same reply as you
- check with neighbours etc. I replied my neighbours didn't have it
and I suggested that the item must have been lost or stolen elsewhere
in the postal system.and asked for a replacement/refund. Wiggle
refunded the cost without any further discusion. Strangely enough the
only time an item from Amazon has failed to reach me was around the
same time. Dodgy temp staff perhaps?
Anyway if not tried already I suggest a further e-mail may
resolve it for you.

Iain.
 
B

bookieb

Guest
On Mar 3, 9:34 am, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Pete Biggs
>
> ('[email protected]') wrote:

<snip>
> Simon Brooke said:
> If, as the OP says, he 'paid for priority dispatch', then quality of
> delivery service becomes part of the contract, I would have thought.
>
> --
> [email protected] (Simon Brooke)
>


Does priority dispatch mean:

1. That it'll be brought to the delivery address by "Express Mail" or
other courier service, rather than by regular letter/parcel post, or
by 1st class mail rather than "plain old mail".

or

2. That the put it to the head of their queue in terms of getting it
off the shelf, packed, addressed and sent, and do so ahead of
processing those orders who did not pay for this service.

I would have assumed that it meant 2., but thinking about it, does it
mean 1. instead?

Or should I just cop myself on and look up the words "dispatch" and
"delivery" in a dictionary instead?

bookieb
 
A

Ambrose Nankivell

Guest
Pete Biggs wrote:
>> It's now called "Recorded Signed ForT".

>
> The "T" was a little "TM" when I pasted it.


I've found that when pasting non-ASCII Unicode into usenet. It seems to
use iconv transliteration, which is not what's expected.

A
 
C

Colin McKenzie

Guest
Pete Biggs wrote:
> OK, this info on the Trading Standards site contradicts what I said:
>
> "OTHER LEGISLATION AFFECTING CONSUMER CONTRACTS
> Loss or damage in transit
>
> If the trader arranges for goods to be delivered to a consumer, the goods
> remain at the trader's risk until delivery. It is, therefore, the trader's
> responsibility to ensure that goods are not lost or damaged in transit,
> and/or to take out appropriate insurance. It follows that optional postal
> insurance should never be offered to consumers."


Interesting. Many Ebay sellers do just that, and allege they are not
liable if you don't pay extra for insurance. It looks like they're
wrong - but is this the rule for private sellers as well as traders?

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
 
N

Nigel Cliffe

Guest
Colin McKenzie wrote:
> Pete Biggs wrote:
>> OK, this info on the Trading Standards site contradicts what I said:
>>
>> "OTHER LEGISLATION AFFECTING CONSUMER CONTRACTS
>> Loss or damage in transit
>>
>> If the trader arranges for goods to be delivered to a consumer, the
>> goods remain at the trader's risk until delivery. It is, therefore,
>> the trader's responsibility to ensure that goods are not lost or
>> damaged in transit, and/or to take out appropriate insurance. It
>> follows that optional postal insurance should never be offered to
>> consumers."

>
> Interesting. Many Ebay sellers do just that, and allege they are not
> liable if you don't pay extra for insurance. It looks like they're
> wrong - but is this the rule for private sellers as well as traders?


There is lots of protection for buyers if the seller is a trader.

In general, there is almost no protection if the seller is private.

Problem with Ebay is a significant number of "private" sellers who would be
doing so much trade as to really count as "traders". See recent warning
from HM Revenue about declaring taxes.


- Nigel


--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
 
R

Rob Morley

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Colin
McKenzie
[email protected] says...
> Pete Biggs wrote:
> > OK, this info on the Trading Standards site contradicts what I said:
> >
> > "OTHER LEGISLATION AFFECTING CONSUMER CONTRACTS
> > Loss or damage in transit
> >
> > If the trader arranges for goods to be delivered to a consumer, the goods
> > remain at the trader's risk until delivery. It is, therefore, the trader's
> > responsibility to ensure that goods are not lost or damaged in transit,
> > and/or to take out appropriate insurance. It follows that optional postal
> > insurance should never be offered to consumers."

>
> Interesting. Many Ebay sellers do just that, and allege they are not
> liable if you don't pay extra for insurance. It looks like they're
> wrong - but is this the rule for private sellers as well as traders?
>

If they're /really/ private sellers then it's a matter to be agreed
between you. If they're part-time traders masquerading as private
sellers then in theory they shouldn't get away with it but in practice
you might not find it easy to bring them to book.
 
R

raisethe

Guest
On 2 Mar, 17:49, Rola <[email protected]> wrote:
> I seem to be having a problem with them. After always singing their
> praises it looks like the inevitable as happened.
>
> Placed an order, paid for priority dispatch and got nothing. Instead of
> sending via the usual courier they sent via 1st class royal mail - not
> even recorded or signed for. So some postie is probably riding round
> with some dura ace 10 speed kit now :)
>
> Found a number for them, but it is a recorded message asking to send an
> email. I have sent an email and got an initial reply saying I should
> check with neighbours and the local sorting office - which I have done.
> But they seem to have ceased responding when I ask for an update on the
> situation.
>
> The value paid for was over 110GBP... so I'm a bit vexed at the moment....



Yes, Wiggle seem to have lost the plot this year. Remember two or
three weeks back when our credit cards were getting cancelled? Well, I
am still awaiting the goods they claim to have already delivered. They
ignored one email but responded to a follow up when they claimed that
they didn't receive the original. Strange that.

Wiggle are clearly undergoing an internal trauma. I will only
communicate with them by recorded snail mail in future, until I either
get my goods or a refund. I will not use them again.
 
R

Roger Merriman

Guest
Pete Biggs <[email protected]> wrote:

> Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> > there is no "signed for" only recorded delevery

>
> It's now called "Recorded Signed ForT".


all the internal doc and usege calls it recorded delevery. some of the
stickers have sighed for you but quite a lot don't. it seems to be a new
>
> > which, is the proof of posting,

>
> Yes but proof of posting can be obtained with ordinary First Class as well.
>
> ~PB


true but it doesn't track the item, and takes same path though the
system with all that entails, so if something is fragile its better via
special delvery as they don't travel with the rest.

roger
 
D

Dave Larrington

Guest
In news:[email protected],
iarocu <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> On 2 Mar, 21:29, Rola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> Thanks for all the tips so far - will keep you posted. I see that
>> they have updated the web page design - maybe everyone in the office
>> has been tied up with that and I'm being ignored for a reason :)

>
>
> I had an item from Wiggle fail to appear just before christmas. Again
> sent by 1st class mail. I e-mailed them and got the same reply as you
> - check with neighbours etc. I replied my neighbours didn't have it
> and I suggested that the item must have been lost or stolen elsewhere
> in the postal system.and asked for a replacement/refund. Wiggle
> refunded the cost without any further discusion.


Likewise. Except that they sent me a new item (Cateye EL530) which arrived
the next day.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
God was my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had
to eat Him.
 
R

Rola

Guest
Josey wrote:
> This might help
>
> http://www.trials-forum.co.uk/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t61981.html
>
>

It helped a great deal, thanks!

A quick phone call and they apologised and have resubmitted the order
free of charge.

The guy on the phone told me that they are currently inundated with
emails. I expressed concern that my last 3 follow up emails have not
been replied to. I was also informed that orders under £150 could be
shipped via royal mail - which seems a change of direction as my
previous orders have nearly all been via a courier except a few that
have been recorded/signed for.

Although they have acted fairly, they are striking me as not being over
customer friendly - with their very poor communication and an upublished
telephone number. I think I may be a chainreactioncycles.com convert......
 
D

Dave

Guest
"Pete Biggs" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]
> Chris Hills wrote:
>
> > OP said it was sent first class, which isn't recorded.

>
> It can be (for 58p extra), but wasn't in this case according to the OP.
>
> > I would be
> > rather angry with their response, as it is their duty to ensure the
> > goods arrived. From their response it sounds as though they are
> > trying to get away with it. I would write them a letter, and if they
> > don't send a timely reply, go to small claims court.

>
> It is not the retailer's duty to ensure the goods arrive. The goods

legally
> become the buyer's property the moment they are posted. It's about
> "transfer of title", iirc.
>
> The only question is whether ordinary First Class was a reasonable service
> to use for this order. I'm not sure, but I can't think it makes much
> difference as stuff shouldn't be left outside the property even when it's
> not Recorded, or "Signed For" as it's now called.
>
> ~PB
>
>


Recorded on allows for claims of upto £32.00 so it should have gone Special
Delivery at least.

Dave
 

Similar threads

J
Replies
7
Views
301
UK and Europe
Zog The Undeniable
Z