TiddlyPom

Yes it was pretty dry but once you get into the practical stuff of actually being in court, it's hugely fun.
I personally love the Carlill case... mere puff!

Ok, update time.
Tried to reach an agreement with them this morning but they went on and on about how we had just changed our mind. He popped out with his old chestnut 'So you're calling us liars' again and again until his wife told him to zip it.
It was clear we weren't going to agree, so back into the court... and by the time they'd got through everything, due to the hugeness of the case, we couldn't be heard.
Much puffing and moaning from the two in business, and the date will be decided for some time in January.

New things came to light.

Apparently they told us that there would be a 5 week delay in delivering the goods.
If they had told us this, then we wouldn't have gone ahead and ordered in the first place!!!


Also, the second part of the order, which would have proved our claim, was 'shredded' by the business owner for our 'protection'.
When that little gem came up in the mediation, even his wife looked annoyed.

She also told us that they don't come under the 'regular law' (Apparently Trading standards have no authority over them - so if this was the case, how dare Trading standards bring this case before a magistrate in the first place cos surely they should have known better!) because they are 'artisans' ... but that anything they do is decided by Tort Law. (Not sure which Tort .. anyone knows, please let me know!)

I'm quite looking forward to her bringing this up in front of the magistrate because it will make her look like a complete idiot. She's no more above the law for providing goods and services to the public than I am. I am also an 'artisan' because I'm a photographer, but if I provide someone with a promise to do something within a certain time frame and they get pissed off with me because I fail, then I am liable. End of.

And so it still goes on.
The magistrate told us that this was all based on evidence. They have no evidence that we simply 'changed our minds' yet we have sheets and sheets of evidence that they delayed unreasonably.
So we will have to wait for the new date to be set...

Have a nice Christmas!

Cheetah7

How thick must they be, seriously how stupid - they are dragging it out. Do you have to pay for this to go to court?

TiddlyPom

Nope, not one penny. It's not really court. It's done in a court, which frankly, given the amount of times I've been in one over the past two years or so, is starting to feel like home from home. ... but it's done by Fair Trading specially trained mediators who are magistrates and who can make legal orders...
The one this morning was highly amusing... he had bought the product with him and she kept saying over and over that he couldn't present evidence as it was going to take too long, but he kept ignoring her. He couldn't keep his mouth shut. Every few minutes he went on about how I'd delayed him, how I was the one...so she kept telling him to be quiet and that she didn't want to hear it.
He got quite stroppy, saying 'Fine!' in a manner which best suited some teenager having a strop.
He was def not happy about coming back in Jan. He's away in Feb so can't do it. I believe they're going on holiday though they said it was a 'business trip that couldn't be avoided'.
They said they might not be able to find anyone to babysit for them in Jan (can't think they've got many friends left if this is how they act) so the magistrate said it was fine and only one of them need turn up. This threw them into a panic as it can't be him... he's unable to control his temper and manner...
So it might have to be her alone, but they don't want that because she really wasn't there when all this was booked so she really can't say.
So all in all, it's not looking good for them.
They should make a sensible offer but they're not sensible.

Dreamy

Just done a level 1 Law course.. and yes, that one was still widely covered!

To TP - he sounds like he's just pissed off the powers that be (he sounds scarily like TheVileEx actually) so hopefully it'll be a cut and dried situation when you go back in January. Good luck with that x x x

TiddlyPom

Well as the magistrate says, it's only facts that are important. Do they have any? No. Do I? Yes, lots, in print, in their own hand.
Hopefully they'll cut through the bull and it'll work out fine. Getting a bit tedious though.

TiddlyPom

I thougth I'd update.

So we received all the paperwork from the guy and his wife as the court requested.

Several things came to light. On the day I asked for the money back and for him to stop work on the item, his wife said they couldn't because it had been sent away to another 'artisan' to be processed (as is part of the production of this item)
The receipt shows however, that it wasn't sent away until 2 days later - and I've rung the metals place and they say that whatever the date on the paperwork says, that's the date it was delivered to them.
So, lie no 1

Secondly, in writing, he admits that he knew the budget but goes on to explain that the price rose by $900 because when he presented me with a choice of materials, (that according to him at the time, were pretty much the same) I chose the more expensive one... ie $900 more.
He then failed to inform us that this part of the item was more expensive and just added it to the bill.
So he increased the amount of the cost without telling us.
However, speaking to the suppliers of this item (the manufacturer put in that reciept too, so I rang them) , they tell us that one did NOT cost $900 more than the other.
So, lie no.2

He then says he went ahead with the production, even though we told him to stop so that he could 'recoup his costs'...
Yet he handed me a spread sheet breakdown of his costs and it turns out, that apart from GST, the item cost the same as the deposit... so there were no costs to recoup.
Lie no.3

There are other huge inconsistencies in their paperwork which I've passed off to an investigative journalist friend to pull apart... and he's found a load more... too many to mention on here, although one blinder is that on a receipt, they've filled in the numbers AFTERWARDS and with a different pen. Doh!

I think we're in court some time early Feb with these people again so we hope to win.

comet555

Wow, they are incredibly stupid! I hope they get nailed for it

TiddlyPom

You'd think, small business in a small town... and of course, we've told a whole heap of people about it... and then heard of other tales about him 'repairing' certain items so that they're never the same again...but all of our friends will tell all their friends... and so it goes.
I think they're bent on commercial suicide. But if that's their choice, so be it.

Wol

Sounds like a no-brainer to me!

TiddlyPom

I think so too but you never know. Cautiously optimistic..

Swerv-o

This is NSW though - Anything could happen...


S

TiddlyPom

At least it's not Qld.

Swerv-o

No. It will still be light when the hearing has finished...


S

TiddlyPom

That's one benefit. And the pubs will be open to celebrate in...

TiddlyPom

And so it goes.... we were back in today at Fair Trading in a room with our suppliers. We love this whole legal process. Really. Can't think of anything better I'd rather be doing than spending all day talking with magistrates.

So, here's the process for anyone wondering what will happen.

We go into Fair Trading and sit in our room. Magistrate arrives.
Magistrate offers us a chance to sit with a mediator in another room (as we'd had no mediator in the first session)
Mediator asks us what it's all about... are we willing to back down - we say 'no' and so we go back into the other room.

So we presented our case.

Then the opposition had a few minutes to 'cross examine' which didn't go very well as they had nothing to ask us.

Then they presented their case.

We asked them a few questions about why they'd increased the price and not told us etc.

There was some further discussion and in that, they agreed that the initial contract was for 3 weeks delivery and that we were right about that.

They said that we had delayed them by me 'not answering my phone'... and that they had been ill, though they didn't communicate that to us at any point.

I had print outs of my texts to them, plus some Facebook contact which they'd responded to regarding the product, which showed they had delayed beyond the three weeks.

At the end of it, we were given 5 mins to surmise each.
At the end of their summation, he said 'I'd be quite happy to give the deposit back if we sell the product'...

At this point we couldn't quite believe he was making an offer to us, because the place to do this was in the mediation beforehand.
We couldn't address it then because our session had finished...

So we got up and left.
We were told we wouldn't have a decision today because the magistrate would need an hour to go through the thing and he already had too many cases.

When I got back home, we emailed the supplier asking if his statement was an offer and if it was, then this might form the basis for a negotiation to solve the issue. We basically left the window open for them to continue talking but once the magistrate has made a decision, then that's binding. I haven't yet had any email back from the supplier. It might be in their interests to respond quickly.

So, it appears, without all the other crap to confuse the issue, is that there's a breach of contract.
The contract was for 3 weeks. It was breached by them and we were within our rights to cancel.

Saying that, they say that they did explain there were delays so ... you know.

I'll let you know when there's an outcome.