See you in Court Curry's, JVC, YouTube, and the Humberside Police

See you in Court Curry's, JVC, YouTube, and the Humberside Police

I could not sleep last night because my mind was racing. Therefore, I did some research on my computer. When it got light I took Rocky for a walk. I called in at my friend Kathleen's. On Monday she is giving her Inaugural Lecture on becoming a Professor of Philosophy, and I have received an invitation.

On my way back through Pearson Park there was, if not a sea, waves of Snow Drops. I thought I would video them for Cherrypie. No such luck! Seconds after I started shooting the camcorder shut down. I tried to film again, a message informed me that the video file was damaged and in need of repair.

After managing to get a few hours sleep, I went along to Curry's on Clough Road where they have a reputation for ripping off customers selling JVC Everio GZ-MS 100 memory camcorders. A clear label states YouTube one touch upload. You would expect it to do what it says on the tin. However, the claim is fraudulent. Not fit for purpose.

"Sale of Goods Act 1979:

13. Sale by description

(1) Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied term that the goods will correspond with the description.

(1A) As regards England and Wales and Northern Ireland, the term implied by subsection (1) above is a condition".

So, we have a breach of contract.

"14. Implied terms about quality or fitness

(1) Except as provided by this section and section 15 below and subject to any other enactment, there is no implied term about the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale.

(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.

(2A) For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.

(2B) For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

(a) fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

(b) appearance and finish,

(c) freedom from minor defects,

(d) safety, and

(e) durability".

Hardly meeting the satisfactory test is it?

"Misrepresentation Act 1967

1 Removal of certain bars to rescission for innocent misrepresentation

Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him, and—

(a)the misrepresentation has become a term of the contract; or

(b)the contract has been performed;

or both, then, if otherwise he would be entitled to rescind the contract without alleging fraud, he shall be so entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
2 Damages for misrepresentation

(1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true.

(2)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him otherwise than fraudulently, and he would be entitled, by reason of the misrepresentation, to rescind the contract, then, if it is claimed, in any proceedings arising out of the contract, that the contract ought to be or has been rescinded, the court or arbitrator may declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission, if of opinion that it would be equitable to do so, having regard to the nature of the misrepresentation and the loss that would be caused by it if the contract were upheld, as well as to the loss that rescission would cause to the other party.

(3)Damages may be awarded against a person under subsection (2) of this section whether or not he is liable to damages under subsection (1) thereof, but where he is so liable any award under the said subsection (2) shall be taken into account in assessing his liability under the said subsection (1)".

The upshot of it is that Curry's refused to give me my money back. They claimed that their policy states it has to be returned within 28 days. They would not budge and neither would I so they called the police. The police asked me to leave or I would be arrested.

See you in Court Curry's, JVC, YouTube, and the Humberside Police.