Right to cancel order of new caravan

[Raywood]

Nice clear unambiguous english. But not legal imo for reasons previously provided.



My inner cynic says to me your dealer wants his cake and also wants to eat it. He stands to gain a further £2630 for minimum admin work.

I do not think they are approaching this illogically. If they put a report together to explain their costs to date, that is what you would be liable for. The may even get that to the £1000 with clever accountancy. Then you would have no come back imo.

But no, they appear to be being intransigent. I see them rubbing their hands together hoping you pull out so they can capitalise.

In your dealers favour. they do seem to be honouring a fixed agreed price. Others on the forum are experiencing price rises.

The law simply does not want either party to profit from withdrawing. Nor does it want them to lose out.


John

Not sure why you feel my advice is possibly wrong as it is based on expert advice in so far as the deposit return is concerned. The simple fact is that if you fail to complete a contract then you lose the deposit unless the other party agrees to return it or the contract terms allow it. This is strengthened even further in this case as the order form did in fact say the deposit was not refundable. The wording in the contract was very clear and unambiguous and there is no real room for argument there. The deposit is a sign of good faith by the purchaser showing his intention to purchase and provided t is reasonable then if he purchaser fails to complete the contract the seller can retain the deposit.
I accept the points on Condition 17 are my opinion based on my legal knowledge and while I am pretty confident on that there is always some doubt on any case if taken to court, but the condition is patently unfair and would almost certainly fail except in extreme circumstances.

 

[Buckman]

Not sure why you feel my advice is possibly wrong as it is based on expert advice in so far as the deposit return is concerned. The simple fact is that if you fail to complete a contract then you lose the deposit unless the other party agrees to return it or the contract terms allow it. This is strengthened even further in this case as the order form did in fact say the deposit was not refundable. The wording in the contract was very clear and unambiguous and there is no real room for argument there. The deposit is a sign of good faith by the purchaser showing his intention to purchase and provided t is reasonable then if he purchaser fails to complete the contract the seller can retain the deposit.
I accept the points on Condition 17 are my opinion based on my legal knowledge and while I am pretty confident on that there is always some doubt on any case if taken to court, but the condition is patently unfair and would almost certainly fail except in extreme circumstances.

It must be remembered that commercial and consumer contracts are totally different and there is a lot of legislation to protect the consumer. However hopefully the OP will come back to update us on what he has had confirmed by a qualified legal expert.

 

[Jcloughie]

Not sure why you feel my advice is possibly wrong as it is based on expert advice in so far as the deposit return is concerned. The simple fact is that if you fail to complete a contract then you lose the deposit unless the other party agrees to return it or the contract terms allow it. This is strengthened even further in this case as the order form did in fact say the deposit was not refundable. The wording in the contract was very clear and unambiguous and there is no real room for argument there. The deposit is a sign of good faith by the purchaser showing his intention to purchase and provided t is reasonable then if he purchaser fails to complete the contract the seller can retain the deposit.
I accept the points on Condition 17 are my opinion based on my legal knowledge and while I am pretty confident on that there is always some doubt on any case if taken to court, but the condition is patently unfair and would almost certainly fail except in extreme circumstances.

As it says, “imo for reasons previously provided”.

But simply that. my opinion. but based on the links I provided which also seemed unambiguous. The point I was making, is it can be as clear and unambiguous as you want. if is is not lawful, it will not stand. However, I must admit to not being 100% having read conflicting legal advice. But, if it was me, I would push for a settlement and not accept terms at face value.

John

 

[Dustydog]

In isolation one by one it can be argued every view ,proposal, is correct. Now we know why we have the Courts. Remember all the neighbours wasting nearly a million contesting a useless 6” strip of land.
Hopefully , if we haven’t scared the OP off he will let us know, his solicitors view, and the result of any “friendly” meeting with the Dealers MD.

 

[Hutch]

I think McPhillips has gone quiet over the replys. Too techy. As almost always for the forum. I hope all goes well for him.

 

[Parksy]

......Hopefully , if we haven’t scared the OP off he will let us know, his solicitors view, and the result of any “friendly” meeting with the Dealers MD.

I think McPhillips has gone quiet over the replys. Too techy. As almost always for the forum. I hope all goes well for him.

This is what I warned against in post #71.
As usual, the forum experts who are microbiologists, military strategists and expert contract lawyers all rolled into one ignored my words of caution and advice because they had to have their say no matter what.
Dissapointing but typical. 🙄

 

[Jcloughie]

This is what I warned against in post #74.
As usual, the forum experts who are microbiologists, military strategists and expert contract lawyers all rolled into one ignored my words of caution and advice because they had to have their say no matter what.
Dissapointing but typical. 🙄

I don’t see this topic as being confrontational in the slightest. Yes there are differences of opinion. But they have been delivered politely and constructively and many gave the same advice of getting professional advice to the OP. Which clearly recognises that people are aware of their linitations.

This is also the case from #71 on. Others opinions and recollection’s may differ. (thank god).

John

 

[Parksy]

I don’t see this topic as being confrontational in the slightest. Yes there are differences of opinion. But they have been delivered politely and constructively and many gave the same advice of getting professional advice to the OP. Which clearly recognises that people are aware of their linitations.

This is also the case from #71 on. Others opinions and recollection’s may differ. (thank god).

John

I never stated that this thread was confrontational or that those with differing opinions were rude to each other John.
If you read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote, I stated that different opinions had been offered, this thread really has nowhere else to go that would be of any help to the OP, and that further debate, with its variety of opinions and experience would be better added to the second very similar but not identical thread.
This was to avoid the possibility of the original question and answers so far given becoming bogged down with further unrelated points being made.
The O.P. stands to lose a significant sum of money.
As mentioned by Hutch earlier, we should avoid rubbing salt into the wound by yet more back and forth discussion here when there's a similar thread available to discuss the finer points of the law as members see them.
Yes John, some recollections do differ.

 

[Buckman]

This is what I warned against in post #74.
As usual, the forum experts who are microbiologists, military strategists and expert contract lawyers all rolled into one ignored my words of caution and advice because they had to have their say no matter what.
Dissapointing but typical. 🙄

To save confusion do you perhaps mean post #71?

 

[Parksy]

To save confusion do you perhaps mean post #71?

Apologies and thanks for spotting my mix up.
I've edited my earlier comment to show the correct post.

 

[Jcloughie]

I never stated that this thread was confrontational or that those with differing opinions were rude to each other John.
If you read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote, I stated that different opinions had been offered, this thread really has nowhere else to go that would be of any help to the OP, and that further debate, with its variety of opinions and experience would be better added to the second very similar but not identical thread.
This was to avoid the possibility of the original question and answers so far given becoming bogged down with further unrelated points being made.
The O.P. stands to lose a significant sum of money.
As mentioned by Hutch earlier, we should avoid rubbing salt into the wound by yet more back and forth discussion here when there's a similar thread available to discuss the finer points of the law as members see them.
Yes John, some recollections do differ.

Fair comment, I just had not seen any new points put since #71. Or that your advice was being ignored.


John

 

[Raywood]

Do not worry too much about me being insulted, I come with the very thick skin that came with my job.
As for this case I am sure that I am right based on the previous experience I have with the same sort of problem. I appreciate the point about the dealer not being abbe to make a profit but assuming the deposit was the standard £500 I do not see this as so exorbitant that a court would rule the contract condition unfair. If you were talking at something over £1,000 there will be a point that it becomes unfair, but every case turns on its own merits.
I think from what has been said the dealer is not going to budge, so keeping going there is not going to work. If the deposit was made using a credit card, a claim against the provider would be investigated by them, but I cannot promise a result. After that the only recourse would be the small claims court, but in my opinion the case is weak, the best chance of success there would be if the dealer found it more expensive to defend than to buy off the claim.
For the purpose of condition 71 I think this can be ignored as it would not kick in until sometime after the cancelation and is therefore irrelevant.

 

[Dustydog]

I wonder if this will become yet another Forum Mystery where the main Protagonist lost patience with us and tore up the last page of the book😢😢

 

[Dustydog]

Confused .com here Clive, Just had an advice from you about Silver Surfer😵‍💫😵‍💫🤔🤔What have I missed?

 

[otherclive]

Confused .com here Clive, Just had an advice from you about Silver Surfer😵‍💫😵‍💫🤔🤔What have I missed?

I got the threads mixed up. Thought this was re the stolen rooflight. You are too quick on the draw as I deleted it within about 15 seconds. 😁

 

[Dustydog]

I got the threads mixed up. Thought this was re the stolen rooflight. You are too quick on the draw as I deleted it within about 15 seconds. 😁

Early morning drugs!

 

[Raywood]

I suspect the OP has read the early posts and has either taken advice elsewhere or given up on the basis that the deposit is not going to be recovered.

 

[Notmyvan]

Hi, I have not been given a VIN number nor an exact delivery date.

So what would happen if the dealer wont refund the deposit, is there a clause in the contract which says that one a deposit has been paid and the caravan has arrived at the dealer if the balance is not paid within a certain period that the caravan will be sold.
If you turned round and said We still want the caravan we are trying to arrange finance on the balance and will let you know when we have it. The dealer cannot sell it to anyone else as you have secured the sale to you, So they are short of the full sale proceeds.
Perhaps ask for 50% of the deposit back.

 

[otherclive]

So what would happen if the dealer wont refund the deposit, is there a clause in the contract which says that one a deposit has been paid and the caravan has arrived at the dealer if the balance is not paid within a certain period that the caravan will be sold.
If you turned round and said We still want the caravan we are trying to arrange finance on the balance and will let you know when we have it. The dealer cannot sell it to anyone else as you have secured the sale to you, So they are short of the full sale proceeds.
Perhaps ask for 50% of the deposit back.

Surely you’ve accepted the terms of the contract so why should a delay to collection be acceptable. Dealers have rights too. If the buyer has a problem with financing the balance within the time period stated the best thing is to contact the dealer and discuss options. Possibly the dealership could arrange finance. After all if I book a holiday and don’t pay my balance then I can’t complain if I lose it. Contracts are a two way agreement.

 

[Robert_374373903]

Many years ago with a purchase of a motorhome which we had left deposit of £1000 and had to cancel as going into hospital for op. They would not refund. About couple of years later at Shepton Mallet show the same dealer was there. The dealer had a Hymer same as ours but this one had the most magnificent seat covers on it. Later that day saw one of the sales person s and told him the story and would he miss those seat covers !. They felt and looked the business on our next trips.

 

[Raywood]

If you have ordered a caravan and paid the deposit, once the caravan is ready you would be required to pay for it and collect it within a reasonable period, although the contract for sale will usually clarify the dealers position. Most will give you a specific time frame and be able to charge you storage fees if you do not collect within this but still buy it.
If you fail to pay for it it then they should send you a warning and be would be able to sell it on if you still do no proceed. The deposit would be forfeited unless subject to a different contract condition. If they cannot sell it at the price agreed and the loss is more than the deposit, they may even be able to sue you for the loss. If you have a problem when the caravan is ready you do need to speak to the dealer and try and sort out a sensible outcome.

 

[joanie]

I find this an interesting thread and maybe the OP has been advised not to post on an open forum, however, I hope he does come back when it is all done and dusted and let us know the outcome. Reading his T&C's it does state that the deposit is lost should you cancel and I read the other bit re. within 60 days as an add on.
A similar thing happened to me some years ago , where I cancelled a motorhome as I was still waiting for it after 6 months, now as with the OP's T&C's time is not of the essence, so they refused to return my deposit. My reason for cancelling was that they had told me the m/h was in and even gave me the reg, number, so I insured it ready to pick up. All was arranged and I phoned them to let them know what time I would be arriving. They then told me that it was still at the factory with no date arranged. It took me 3 months of phoning, asking for my deposit to be returned. The advice that I was given was to keep a level head and a level tongue and only ever speak to the manager. I also kept a note of all that was said. It was very stressful at the time.
Just a thought but ( someone will correct me if I'm way off the mark ) What if he accepted the van and then rejected it within the 30 days ?

 

[otherclive]

Thank you an interesting post. You cannot just reject goods up to 30 days under CRA 2015 without a valid reason; it wouldn’t be fair on a business.

 

[Buckman]

Thank you an interesting post. You cannot just reject goods up to 30 days under CRA 2015 without a valid reason; it wouldn’t be fair on a business.

I don't think that will be much of an issue, as all of them have issues from day one.

 

[Raywood]

The right under the CRA is if the product is defective. If there is a delay in delivery you have to look at he terms of the contract. Unless there is a fixed date for delivery, then it being late is to some extent permitted. You would normally have to show that the delay was unreasonable, assuming an anticipated date was given. If there was no date in the contract, then this becomes a problem, although delivery within a reasonable time would still be an implied term of the contract.