Page 10 of 12 First ... 89101112 Last
Results 91 to 100 of 111

Thread: Sale of Goods Act

  1. #91

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    How come no one has accused Cdn. tire of breaking any laws?
    Lots of people have.

    Read the stories from consumers on this web site, for starters.

    Several of them followed up with reports of getting refunds.

    You can read about the laws yourself on this thread, and see how ct is breaking those laws.

    Plus, you can call the Ministry to hear more.

  2. #92

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    the ellen roseman site has a story about a man who bought a defective grocery cart from canadian tire - he got back $45

    yup - lots of reports of stores not following the sale of goods act and the consumer protection act

    ellen wrote about ‘as seen on tv’ and that 'Angela was entitled to a refund'

    she also wrote about best by and future shop

    and forever 21

    she wrote ‘Under the law, manufacturers and retailers have a duty to supply products fit for the intended purpose’ and ‘If you’re stranded, go to small claims court and cite the Sale of Goods Act as an argument to get your money back.’

    sale of goods act is a 'law'

    so is the consumer protection act

    but i’m guessing the ct people are going to keep arguing - saying none of this is true

    they wouldn't want more consumers pushing for refunds – costs them too much money

    better to make the customer sue - then settle out of court - then claim there are no court rulings

    nice plan - discourages customers from asking for refunds

    this store really does suck

  3. #93
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Seems the Crappy People are the only ones who have a problem with this.

    Lots of reports in the media, from lawyers and even a professor agreeing that consumers should get a refund.

    Its the law. Against the law is illegal. Case closed.

    And spare us rhetoric on these dumb questions. We can read the laws for ourselves.

    I guess the Crappy People just don't want to be out a lot of money.

  4. #94
    Posted by an unregistered user Angry CT Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    933
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    the ellen roseman site has a story about a man who bought a defective grocery cart from canadian tire - he got back $45

    yup - lots of reports of stores not following the sale of goods act and the consumer protection act

    ellen wrote about ‘as seen on tv’ and that 'Angela was entitled to a refund'

    she also wrote about best by and future shop

    and forever 21

    she wrote ‘Under the law, manufacturers and retailers have a duty to supply products fit for the intended purpose’ and ‘If you’re stranded, go to small claims court and cite the Sale of Goods Act as an argument to get your money back.’

    sale of goods act is a 'law'

    so is the consumer protection act

    but i’m guessing the ct people are going to keep arguing - saying none of this is true

    they wouldn't want more consumers pushing for refunds – costs them too much money

    better to make the customer sue - then settle out of court - then claim there are no court rulings

    nice plan - discourages customers from asking for refunds

    this store really does suck
    You lose credibility when you only tell your "version" of the truth and quote only snippets and not the whole story.
    Not to hard to discredit a faker advocate

    Your right to a refund, credit or exchange | Ellen Roseman

    If you read the rest of the story, the customer was given a refund from the corporation and not the store. It was "a measure of good will" and the corporation completely backed the store in adhering to the exchange policy.
    No where does Ellen Roseman say CT did anything illegal.
    Yep, thanks for proving the point of your faker advocateness and lack of relevance. Nothing more than some pissed at life person spouting lies and opinions as truth. Good job.

  5. #95
    Posted by an unregistered user Angry CT Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    933
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Seems the Crappy People are the only ones who have a problem with this.

    Lots of reports in the media, from lawyers and even a professor agreeing that consumers should get a refund.

    Its the law. Against the law is illegal. Case closed.

    And spare us rhetoric on these dumb questions. We can read the laws for ourselves.

    I guess the Crappy People just don't want to be out a lot of money.
    Really? These lawyers and law professor have named CT or ANY other retailer as having an illegal policy?
    There are media reports that state the same?
    Please pass those along so that we can all be enlightened.
    The Ministry of Consumer Affairs actually has a data base the public can access that lists all the companies that have been found in contravention to consumer laws.....how about providing even ONE reference to Canadian Tire.

    Consumer Beware List

    The Ministry doesn't list even ONE example....kind of ruins your theory, you moron.

  6. #96
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    You lose credibility when you only tell your "version" of the truth and quote only snippets and not the whole story.
    Not to hard to discredit a faker advocate

    Your right to a refund, credit or exchange | Ellen Roseman

    If you read the rest of the story, the customer was given a refund from the corporation and not the store. It was "a measure of good will" and the corporation completely backed the store in adhering to the exchange policy.
    No where does Ellen Roseman say CT did anything illegal.
    Yep, thanks for proving the point of your faker advocateness and lack of relevance. Nothing more than some pissed at life person spouting lies and opinions as truth. Good job.
    The CT liars sure do work hard to hide the obvious.

    Ellen wrote, ‘Under the law, manufacturers and retailers have a duty to supply products fit for the intended purpose’.

    And the CT'ers grudginly admitted, "against the law is illegal".

    But the CT liars will continue to try to fool consumers.

    They'll pretend that:

    - Consumers won't get a refund from Company X, if there's no link to a site saying, "Company X has an illegal policy".
    - Consumers won't get a refund from Company X, if Company X isn't listed on the Minstry web site.
    - If a consumer was given a "good will gesture", then it's not a "refund", so other consumers can't count on the same result.
    - Consumers won't get a refund from any store, if there are any stores that sell any item with a manufacture's "repair warranty".
    - Consumers who post information here are only posting their own opinions.
    - Consumers who post information here aren't trust-worthy.

    The list of lies goes on and one.

    But guess what? None of that changes the law.

    There are stories from other consumers on this web site about consumers getting refunds (or at least exchanges, if they are willing to settle).

    So don't believe the CT liars.

    But it kind of makes you wonder: why they spend so much time trying to hide the obvious.

    Could it be .... they will lose money?

  7. #97
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    And don't forget all the links that say "refund"!

    1 – Ellen Roseman, “If the product's a dud, insist on your money back"

    If the product's a dud, insist on your money back - moneyville.ca Blogs

    2 – Ellen Roseman, “Working to fix products that don’t work"

    Roseman: Working to fix products that don

    3 – Miller Tomson, “ARE YOU READY FOR THE ONTARIO CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2002?”

    http://www.millerthomson.com/assets/...05%20Final.pdf

    4 – O’Connor MacLeod Hanna, “Ontario’s New Consumer Protection Law”

    Milton, Burlington, Oakville Lawyers | O'Connor MacLeod Hanna LLP | Ontario

    5 - “is that legal”, Cpt 5: General Consumer’s Rights:
    LEGAL GUIDE: CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW (ONTARIO) - Ch.5: General Consumer Rights

    6 - “is that legal”, Cpt 7: General Civil Remedies:
    LEGAL GUIDE: CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW (ONTARIO) - Ch.7: General Civil Remedies (I)

    7 – Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
    Legislative Assembly of Ontario | Bills & Lawmaking | Past & Present | 37:3 Bill 180, Consumer Protection Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002

    8 – Peterborough and District Labour Council
    PDLC News » The New Face of Consumer Protection Law in Ontario: Consolidate, Update and Escalate

    9 - MCS re: Cancelling:

    Cancelling a Contract - Ministry of Consumer Services

    10 - Blakes (General coverage)

    http://www.blakes.com/pdf/CPA_Oct20_2005.pdf

    11 - Macmillan – General

    http://www.mcmillan.ca/Upload/Public...ct,%202002.pdf

    12 - Stutz & Associates

    W.W. Stutz & Associates ~ Barristors, Solicitors and Notary Public

    13 - MCA – basic info, plain language:

    http://www.sse.gov.on.ca/mcs/Documents/275071.pdf

    14 – UWO
    The University of Western Ontario

    #15 - Professor Iain Ramsay:

    Professor Iain Ramsay on Retailers' Legal Responsibility to Purchasers

    #16 – Industry Canada
    Refund and Exchange - Entire Collection | Canadian Consumer Handbook

    And ther's the CPA itself, too:

    Consumer Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A

  8. #98
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Supplying a product fit for its intended purposes...yes
    That does not mean it can not break or wear out. If it does, it either gets repaired or replacd or refunded...depends no the item. This in no way contravenes the sale of goods act

  9. #99
    Posted by an unregistered user Angry CT Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    933
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Yep, still no mention of CT or ANY other retailer having an illegal policy. Best to contact the Ministry of Consumer Affairs for a truthful answer on this. Consumers won't be fooled into trusting a faker advocates opinion.

  10. #100

    Re: Sale of Goods Act

    Some important things for consumers to remember:

    In Ontario (and other jurisdictions), consumers can get a refund for a defective item (or an exchange, if you prefer):

    - Even if nobody has posted a reference here to "illegal policies" for that retailer (because this doesn't change the laws).

    - Even the retailer isn't listed on a Ministry's "Customer Beware List" (because this doesn't change the laws).

    - Even if a retailer gave a customer a "good will gesture" gift card (because this doesn't change the laws).

    - Even if there are other stores that sell items with a manufacture's "repair warranty" (because this doesn't change the laws).


    Also remember:

    - Consumers who post links to other web sites are not posting their own opinions.

    - Consumers do not need to rely on what's posted here; they can check the links themselves, or call their Consumer's Ministry.

    - Consumers have consistently reported that the Ministry says consumers don't have to settle for a repair.

    - The CT Reps post so many lies about policies, laws, stores and consumers, there a thread just for their main lies: Why Do CT Defenders Post So Many Lies Here?

    - According to the CT Rep, a "Faker Advocate Site" is one with a "donate button", so they defined CT's own Jump Start as a "Faker Advocate Site, too".

Page 10 of 12 First ... 89101112 Last

Similar Threads

  1. Returned goods put back on shelf to be resold (to me)
    By Guest-0291 in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: June 20th, 2014, 10:02 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions