Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: advice needed please

  1. #11

    Re: advice needed please

    (and that a 3rd party cant just come along and make an agreement that changes my rights).thankyou so much youre being most helpful,and itd be a big ping pong ball in the eye of the gunslinger....

  2. #12

    Re: advice needed please

    and yes that was my thinking too,that because a judgement has already been made,that all remains is to sort out how CT are going to pay me.however because of the spanner thrown into the works by this dodgy agreement cooked up between manu and CT i just wanna make sure my facts are straight before going for it.i live hours from town,so cant just go in there at the drop of a hat.thanx again.

  3. #13

    Re: advice needed please

    Hey:

    A while back somebody posted a link or two to the Canadian Bar Association, BC Branch.

    I did a quick Google, and found this. Talks about getting refunds for defective goods.

    Buying Defective Goods

    I seem to recall some posts from the Crappy People denouncing this site. Based on what? I don't recall. Possibly that lawyers know less about the law than the student-minimum-wage returns clerks?

    Maybe call these guys up, and see what they say?

    Like I said, I mostly know Ontario!
    Last edited by CT Challenger; January 29th, 2013 at 05:45 PM.

  4. #14

    Re: advice needed please

    yes i actually read this site first before even putting in the claim.the cba also provides a lawyer referral service where you can get a half hour session with a suitable lawyer for $25 plus tax.but guess what?it has to be face to face,and the nearest one to me thats signed up to this program happens to be in kelowna(or 1 full days drive for me 1 way).not really helpful unless you live in vancouver or whatnot.kinda disappointing.....

  5. #15

    Re: advice needed please

    but i would seriously like for you to point me to exactly where it talks about the agreement between buyer and seller in the CPA.i think that would just add even more weight to what i already have.

  6. #16

    Re: advice needed please

    You need to be aware that this is not some kind of expert legal forum. Rather, it is a forum where ordinary consumers (such as yourself, I assume), can help one-another.

    But I must say, it seems very odd that you claim to have won your case before a judge, yet you don't seem to know very much at all about the laws you must have used to win.

    And you seem to be saying that your case is still unresolved, despite the fact that "a judgement has already been made". It all sems very strange.

    But, that being said, I'm sure there are people here who can help you move things forward, if you are willing to put in some effort on your end.

    Since you are the person in BC, and those are the laws of your land, how about doing a little homework, and people here can help fill in the details?

    From what you've said, a good starting place would be, to actually look through the Act, and figure out the main pieces of your puzzle, i.e.:

    - Who is the "supplier"?
    - Who is the "consumer"?
    - What were the "goods"?
    - Was there a "consumer transaction"?

    Let us know how your research goes, and we'll take it from there!
    Last edited by CT Challenger; January 29th, 2013 at 08:51 PM.

  7. #17

    Re: advice needed please

    yes its all a little odd to me too lol.
    ill try to explain.
    yes im the buyer,and i bought the goods from CT.
    because of their refusal to refund me(or even repair the unit) after the crappy thing stopped working 3 times(never lasted more than about 10 days without breaking down),i took the step of bringing a claim against CT.a lawyer told me that the norm was to sue the seller i.e. CT,and when i asked her about whether or not to claim against the manu,she assured me that it was definitely the seller.(although when i emailed her about this very point a few days ago she totally denied giving me any legal advice).anyway i served the papers via registered mail,and CT didnt respond within the 14 day period that they are given to do this.when i went back to the court they told me to put in a default hearing notice,which i did.this was heard in CTs absence(they dont even get notified because they are in default).the judge agreed with my story and awarded mr the full amount.
    it was only after all of this,when i contacted CT to discuss payment,that i was informed of the agreement made between themselves and the manu.
    which is why i came on here to see if they were allowed to do that.i know very little of the law,and how it works,but i saw no mention about something like this on the SOGA.i appreciate that you arent lawyers.
    like i say i won a judgement,but im just wondering if because of this dodgy agreement set up between CT and the manu,whether they are in fact allowed to do this.no such agreement was ever discussed when i bought the crappy thing,so i think that for them to do this is probably against the terms of either SOGA or CPA,but im not 100% sure....
    there is absolutely no help whatsoever coming from lawyers,which kinda makes things scary.i guess ill just have to follow through to a payment hearing and hope that we are in fact correct,and that CT is still responsible in spite of the agreement that they and the manu cooked up between themselves.hope that makes sense.

  8. #18

    Re: advice needed please

    from what i can gather it appears that SOGA and CPA are very similar in both provinces.

  9. #19

    Re: advice needed please

    ok i can now shed a little more light on this.i just spoke to the supreme court clerk in the local court thats dealing with the matter.(the small goods person is working another job which is why i couldnt speak to her).anyway the manu is champion. bought a generator from CT.anyway the upshot is that neither CT nor champion replied to the original lawsuit i brought against CT.i was concerned because i vaguely remembered reading something about if a 3rd party wanted to get involved i.e. take responsibility for the product,that they had 42 or 43 days(i cant remember which) to reply to the court letting them know about the change.however since neither party did this CT are still in default,and so we are hopefully flying towards getting a payment hearing sorted.
    what i have learned is exactly what we were thinking.a 3rd party cannot just assume this responsibility.the initial contract in place between seller and buyer is exactly that,and needs a courts permission to be changed.so liability rests fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the SELLER.
    think about it.my genny fucked up after a few days,then quit completely within 10.was really hard to start.valves were sticking,which is definitely a manufacturing defect.what would happen if the seller was allowed to just pass responsibility off to the manufacturor(who might not even be based in the country?).the idea that there are repair only warranties sets a very dangerous precedent.in the future will it become that you buy new products at your own risk?that when you get your brand new washing machine home and it doesnt work that you have to get it repaired?thats total bollocks.and this is mainly why i brought the action against CT,in order to show that they cannot just tell me to fuck off and ill go away like a little sheep.it clearly states in the SOGA that goods have to last a reasonable amount of time,and if that is not so,then the seller has breached the warranty,and you are fully entitled to a refund,PLUS any and all incidental expenses arising from the failure of said dodgy crappy product.(the generator cost me $350,and the amount that has been awarded to me so fat stands at nearly $4,500.)if none of us put up with the bullshit attitude shown by the crappy management,and we actually take legal steps(which isnt actually that hard,you find that the court personnel-certainly as far as ive been concerned theyve bent over backwards to explain how to go about shit-are actually pretty dam astute in such matters,which means u dont need a lawyer),then before too long they will be forced into changing their crappy policies which have absolutely no relevence in LAW.

  10. #20
    Senior Member CTH8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,320
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: advice needed please

    Well, that's great news! You won your case!

    It would have been even better if the judge had looked at the facts and the law, and given a ruling on that. But, a win is a win, even if it's through CT defaulting.

    It sound like they threw in this thing about the manufacturer at the last minute, to try and cloud the issue, and maybe to try to get you to back down or have last-minute doubts. Glad you didn't fall for it!
    Last edited by CTH8R; February 2nd, 2013 at 04:30 PM.

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions