is every web retaler breaking the DSR's

  Kevscar1 06:10 09 Jul 2008

The Office of Fair Trading state that Terms and Conditions must be supplied to the Consumer in a durable form. They state there is no specific list but includes e-mails and letters.
They go on to say that a webpage is definitly not acceptable because it can be changed by the website owner at anytime.
In all my years of buying on the internet I have not dealt with one company who obeys this, the only good thing is whenever I have had a problem I always win because there T&C's are invalid.
Most of them also have what the OFT states are unfair terms in them.
If you have trouble with any company who has not sent you proper T&C's download oft143 & OFT698 from their site then contact Trading Standards

  spuds 23:13 09 Jul 2008

" is every web retaler breaking the DSR's"

Not every, but a fair number apparently. I mentioned the OFT/Trading Standards joint survey report, and their findings in this forum a few months ago ;o)

In most cases its not blatant flouting of consumer law, just old fashion ignorance. Regarding invalid terms and condition, that can depend on a number of things before becoming invalid under the terms of Unfair Contract.

  Kevscar1 06:05 10 Jul 2008

Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law.
I tend to think that they hope the buyer is ignorant so they can get away with denying them their rights.
One company I had trouble with still only has T&c's on a webpage despite me pointing out the regs in march

  crosstrainer 08:50 10 Jul 2008

The devil is (as usual) in the detail.

All they have to do is include (in tiny print at the bottom of the page)

"These Terms And Conditions Are Subject To change without warning"

Sad but true.

  Kevscar1 14:19 10 Jul 2008

No it isn't OFT say T&C's must be in durable form and a webpage is unacceptable because they can change it.
Once they have been put in durable form that is the basis of the contract and cannot be changed without your agreement

  crosstrainer 14:27 10 Jul 2008

By including the exclusion, the terms become "durable" due to the customers acceptance.

  Kevscar1 17:46 10 Jul 2008

This is copied from the OFT.s guidelines to complying with the DSR's
Durable medium is not defined in the DSRs. Our view is that it means a form in which information can be retained and reproduced but cannot be edited, such as an email that can be printed or a letter, fax or brochure that can be kept for future reference.
We do not consider that information on a website is durable as it can be changed at any time after the consumer has accessed it.
Dictionary - Durable - 1 entry.
1. a. - Able to endure or continue in a particular condition; lasting; not perishable or changeable; not wearing out or decaying soon; enduring; as, durable cloth; durable happiness.

  spuds 23:25 10 Jul 2008

If you have a hour or two to spare, then read the proper statutory instruments version of the DSR click here

  Kevscar1 06:03 11 Jul 2008

it's not just online business, in the last 18 months I have had Home Ins Co try to get out of paying £27000 for damages to my house until I brought the Police in. Egg who thought they could get away with charging me 141%APR instead of 16.9. That fight took 6 months until I said one of their directors would have to face fraud charges. Carphone Warehouse who lied to me to keep my mobile contract, again have had to threaten fraud charges. ComputerPlanet who promised delivery in 7 days and on day 26 said a part which they originally stated was compatible wasn't then refused to let me cancel. Then decide they couldn't fit 2 other parts and sent it on day 38 and it didn't work. Now PC Option who 25 days ago assured me delivery within 15.

  spuds 10:23 11 Jul 2008

What are you actually trying to suggest, that every company that you deal with is up to no good, or is there something more than that, and you are trying to right the possible wrongs in this world.

Okay I agree that there are a lot of concerns out there, and possibly like you, I try to fly the banner from time to time. But lets face it, we are but a small ripple in a large pond, the commercial side will always win.

And as for stating that threats of police involvement and legal action for fraud proceeding is the only way forward, then the mystery seems to deepen even further. Don't get me wrong, I am not having a go at you, just very curious as to the way you are trying to inform other people, on your crusade perhaps!.

  Kevscar1 17:30 11 Jul 2008

Note a Crusade just that I learnt along time ago not to let anybody get away with anything. The trouble with a lot, not all, of companies is they think that because they are big and powerful the ordinary man can be treated anyway they want.
Neither do I think that Police or Fraud action is the answer in every case but after 6 months of Egg threatening me with legal action because I wouldn't pay 141%Apr I felt it was only fair to threaten them with legal action too. 2 Days after they phoned with profuse apologies and promised to correct everything.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

HP Envy x2 review: Hands-on

How Sketch and InVision have revolutionised our design workflow

The best tech gifts for Christmas 2017

Les meilleurs jeux de société (2017)