Advice for court meditation - missold

A

Adoni123

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 July 2020
Messages
141
Visit site
Hi all,

I was hoping to get some advice from anyone who has been missold a horse before and gone to court. I am going to meditation too and haven't done anything like this before.

Long story short - I bought a horse, novice ride. Wasn't as described - wanted to throw everyone off. I said within first week I'd like to return and she went back on day 10. To me it's as simple as that and a clear cut case. I only got half of the money I spent on the horse back because I was so desperate for her to go as he was dangerous and my mental health was terrible and I'd like the other half back.

Any advice?

TIA x
 
Just a typo but maybe some meditation would be good right now...

Denies that they are dealers but I have plenty proof as they certainly are dealers and am happy to prove that

I think they took advantage of me to be honest. I said the horse wasn't fit for purpose and they turned that around on me. At the time I was just desperate for the horse to be gone
 
Did you agree to the 50% refund in total or are they supposed to pay back the rest at a later date? In what way did they “turn it around” on you when you said the horse wasn’t fit for purpose?

My advice would be to get all of your evidence (text messages etc) together before the mediation and write down a clear timeline of what happened and all of the communication you had with the seller both before and after purchase. If the seller is denying they are a dealer and you have proof that they are you can provide this.

Being prepared and having everything written down will make you feel less apprehensive.
 
Is this a small claim through the small claims court?

If so, then if it's still the same as 3 years ago when I took a case, the result of the mediation isn't binding, you don't have to accept it if you don't like it, but for a small extra fee you can have a court sitting with a judge.
.
 
Upthecreek said:
Did you agree to the 50% refund in total or are they supposed to pay back the rest at a later date? In what way did they “turn it around” on you when you said the horse wasn’t fit for purpose?

My advice would be to get all of your evidence (text messages etc) together before the mediation and write down a clear timeline of what happened and all of the communication you had with the seller both before and after purchase. If the seller is denying they are a dealer and you have proof that they are you can provide this.

Being prepared and having everything written down will make you feel less apprehensive.
Click to expand...
And will also help you to come across as coherent, avoiding confusion over material facts. It’s easy to get confused when under pressure.

Wishing you the best of luck OP. Let us know how you get on? Accessing the BHS legal service or citizens advice if you haven’t already might help to guide you through the process.
 
Adoni123 said:
Just a typo but maybe some meditation would be good right now...

Denies that they are dealers but I have plenty proof as they certainly are dealers and am happy to prove that

I think they took advantage of me to be honest. I said the horse wasn't fit for purpose and they turned that around on me. At the time I was just desperate for the horse to be gone
Click to expand...

was it the dealer who sold the horse or were they selling a horse for a client?

it is difficult to see what happened. You sent the horse back and got some money back which you accepted because he was dangerous and it was making you mentally ill. Did you and the dealer come to an agreement on the terms of this? if not and it was intended that you would get all the money back have you been pursuing the dealer since. Do they realise they are in the middle of what will be a claim to get more money back? What are their reasons for refusing to pay.
Is there any paperwork to support the agreement you came to with the dealer.

I may have got it wrong but it sounds almost as if you were just desperate for him to go and accepted whatever the dealer offered as a settlement. Now looking at it again you want the rest.
 
but it sounds almost as if you were just desperate for him to go and accepted whatever the dealer offered as a settlement.
Click to expand...

It’s irrelevant. Unless the OP has in writing that the sum received (and accepted) was full and final payment (and even that might be wrong) they’re entitled to a full refund, if the seller was a dealer.
 
Amymay said:
It’s irrelevant. Unless the OP has in writing that the sum received (and accepted) was full and final payment (and even that might be wrong) they’re entitled to a full refund, if the seller was a dealer.
Click to expand...
That’s my interpretation of the situation too. The dealer is pulling a fast one. Sounds like there’s a need to prove the seller as a dealer and that they weren’t acting as an agent as that can change things (though I admit, I’m not sure how significantly).
 
Amymay said:
It’s irrelevant. Unless the OP has in writing that the sum received (and accepted) was full and final payment (and even that might be wrong) they’re entitled to a full refund, if the seller was a dealer.
Click to expand...

we simply don't know what OP agreed to, if the dealer was selling for themselves or on behalf of a client or indeed exactly what has happened or even when.
 
I just hope your judge is better than the one I was involved with in Worcester a couple of years ago. I helped a farm contractor try to recover money for unpaid ground work and stable erection.

The contractor had stupidly done the work with very little money up front and the customer decided they didn't like the stables and yard so refused to pay. The judge found against the contractor and criticised him for not taking money as the job proceeded. The judge didn't look at any of the drawings or the emails confirming the customer was happy with the work etc etc. The hearing lasted less than half hour and it was very obvious the judge had no interest and no knowledge of the subject. It was truly cringeworthy. The contractor cut his losses, paid costs and didn't appeal as he felt it would be good money after bad. It left a very bitter taste and I question the transparency of the service.
 
AdorableAlice said:
I just hope your judge is better than the one I was involved with in Worcester a couple of years ago. I helped a farm contractor try to recover money for unpaid ground work and stable erection.

The contractor had stupidly done the work with very little money up front and the customer decided they didn't like the stables and yard so refused to pay. The judge found against the contractor and criticised him for not taking money as the job proceeded. The judge didn't look at any of the drawings or the emails confirming the customer was happy with the work etc etc. The hearing lasted less than half hour and it was very obvious the judge had no interest and no knowledge of the subject. It was truly cringeworthy. The contractor cut his losses, paid costs and didn't appeal as he felt it would be good money after bad. It left a very bitter taste and I question the transparency of the service.
Click to expand...

That is dreadful and quite honestly sounds dodgy - Masons?
 
Consumer Rights Act 1 October 2015
As a customer you enter into a contract with a retailer when you buy a product.

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (if entered into or after 1 October 2015) or the Sales of Goods Act 1979 (if entered before then) the retailer of the product has to ensure it is of satisfactory quality at the time of sale.

This means it should be fit for its purpose, free from minor defects, safe and durable.

Because it has stopped working there is a presumption that the fault was present at the time of sale.

As a result of this, the retailer is in breach of the contract and under the 2015 Act the purchaser is entitled to a repair or replacement.

The retailer should do this within a reasonable amount of time, without causing any significant inconvenience and it should cover all the associated costs.

One can enforce this right for up to six years from the date of the breach, regardless of whether you have a warranty.

It is also an offence to give consumers misleading information about their legal rights.

Covers all goods including horses, livery yards, riding lessons and horsebox repairs.

Buyers have the right to a 30 day refund for faulty, not as described (always keep advert) or not fit for purpose goods bought from a business such as dealers.
Even after 30 days have passed the buyer can still be entitled to a refund - full if under 6 months, or partial if over 6 months but must allow the trader to repair or replace the item first.

However if you buy privately this does not apply.
 
Peter what people also often don't realise is that it doesn't apply if you buy from a dealer, but the dealer is selling that particilar horse for a fee on behalf of its owner, either.
.
 
ycbm said:
Peter what people also often don't realise is that it doesn't apply if you buy from a dealer, but the dealer is selling that particilar horse for a fee on behalf of its owner, either.
.
Click to expand...
Surely the easiest way for a dealer to dodge liability would be to get a mate to say the horse was theirs being sold on their behalf? Difficult to pin anything on them if that’s the case?
 
Melody Grey said:
Surely the easiest way for a dealer to dodge liability would be to get a mate to say the horse was theirs being sold on their behalf? Difficult to pin anything on them if that’s the case?
Click to expand...

In that case you sue the owner, who is liable for any lies told by the dealer, but agency sales that go wrong are fraught with difficulty and best thought of as private sales, buyer beware, with some additional security if the dealer values their own reputation enough.
.
 
I wouldn't bother with the mediation process at all. Even if the other party agrees they don't have to do what they said they would in the mediation and there's nothing you can do about it. It's better to just go straight to small claims court, the process is straightforward and you are then entitled to use a bailiff service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top