Halfords-Breach of Contract (Supply of Goods and Services Act)

GrandmaD

New Member
Feb 18, 2013
4
0
0
I want to check my understanding is correct of this as this is only the second time I have filed a claim for Breach of Contract under the above act.

Christmas Eve last year I noticed my blowers started blowing cold and my running temp on the car was barely registering. As I was due to drive from S Wales to Derby boxing day with my partner and two young children I was unsure whether it was safe to do so or indeed if it'd even be comfortable.

I took the car to Halfords. They rang me an hour later and said there was an issue with the back breaking system but they'd manage to fix the problems with the blowers and the running temp. They told me there was a blockage in the air system and it had been corrected and the running temp was fine and the blowers were blowing warm-the car they informed me had been 'rad tested'. I authorised the work on the back braking system to be carried out.

I collected the car but less than a mile away from the centre the temp dropped back down and the blowers were blowing cold. I rang the centre twenty mins later but they were closed.

My trip to derby was postponed due to a sudden family bereavement (my partners grandmother suddenly died boxing day) so we postponed it to the 27th.

I rang halfords on the 27th and they asked me to bring the car back in but I couldnt do so because we were travelling up to Derby that day. I booked the car in for 31st Dec.

When I took the car in I asked another manager what a 'road test' entailed. I was told a 2-3 mile drive in the car and I said I believed that hadnt been carried out because I had driven less than a mile and it was apparant the problem hadnt been fixed. The manager said he's fit a new thermostat at no charge. He rang back up later that day and said the running temp was now normal but the blowers were still blowing cold. He believed there was debris blocking the heater matrix.

Because work with the matrix is labour intensive I decided to take the car away and get cheaper quotes.

The next day I noticed water leaking but thought nothing of it because the cars cooling system had just been flushed and assumed it was residue water.
However the leak persisted but the weather had turned call and as I noticed the water in the morning I assumed this was frost melting.

8 days later driving home late from work the car temp went right up into the red. I had to stop the car 3 times going home to allow the car to cool to allow me to drive home.

The next day I checked the car and there was no water in the car. I once sagain rang halfords. They took the car. Gave me a courtesy car and looked at the car. They fitted a brand new water pump (however they said there was nothing wrong with the old one) but they did notice water leaking from the thermostat they'd fitted.

They tightened it all up and returned the car. No charge was made for this work. They told me upon return of the car the cam belt was seriously frayed and needed changing urgently and the heater matrix definitely needed replacing and they quoted me £620.

At this point I lost faith in their ability to provide an adequate service. I took my car to another garage. This garage told me the cam belt wasnt that bad and it wasnt the heater matrix but the solenoid.

I emailed Halfords. Told them I believed they were in breach of contract and asked for £200 in recognition of repeated visits. I had to drive to Derby with two kids and an upset partner in a freezing cold car and also thsi would help towards my bill with another garage.

They refused. So Ive filed court papers for breach of contract.

Do I have a case here or am I mistaken?
 

ALewis

Moderator
Nov 23, 2010
691
4
0
South Wales
Hello there,
I believe that you may have trouble with a claim for breach of contract, simply because you have no contract with them under SOGSA Part II.
In order to have a contract, there must be consideration, and by the looks of things, you've not given any monetary consideration or any other consideration for the services provided.

However there must be an internal, out of court procedure to follow in order to claim for consequential losses. Whereby you have had a monetary loss due to their actions (the petrol to go back and fourth). However you can't really put a value on being cold.

So, in my opinion anyway, your case will not be heard, there is no contract in my eyes.
Part II specifically mentions consideration forming a contract.
 

GrandmaD

New Member
Feb 18, 2013
4
0
0
Part 2 of the act:

The contracts concerned.E+W+N.I..(1)In this Act a “contract for the supply of a service” means, subject to subsection (2) below, a contract under which a person (“the supplier”) agrees to carry out a service. .
(2)For the purposes of this Act, a contract of service or apprenticeship is not a contract for the supply of a service. .
(3)Subject to subsection (2) above, a contract is a contract for the supply of a service for the purposes of this Act whether or not goods are also— .
(a)transferred or to be transferred, or .
(b)bailed or to be bailed by way of hire, .
under the contract, and whatever is the nature of the consideration for which the service is to be carried out.
(4)The Secretary of State may by order provide that one or more of sections 13 to 15 below shall not apply to services of a description specified in the order, and such an order may make different provision for different circumstances. .
(5)The power to make an order under subsection (4) above shall be exercisable by statutory instrument subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament. .
13 Implied term about care and skill. E+W+N.I..In a contract for the supply of a service where the supplier is acting in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service with reasonable care and skill.

The bit in bold is the part in specific I feel is relevant. I dont see any actual part mentioning a specific contract?

Surely there are implied terms. I.E I provide you with a job and you carry out a service.

I mean if Halfords were repairing my brakes and the brakes were faulty and I had a crash are you saying there's no comeback under the SOGASA?

I find that hard to imagine?
 

ALewis

Moderator
Nov 23, 2010
691
4
0
South Wales
I'm fully aware of S.13 SOGSA. However what I'm saying is, in order for a contract to exist there must be: 1. An offer , 2. Acceptance , 3. Consideration

The offer exists, the acceptance exists, however there is no consideration on your part.

If by all means you had paid for them to sort out your issues, and the issues weren't resolved, then and only then you'd have a case under S.13 . However I think you'll struggle to prove a contract exists when there is no consideration, this instance would merely be classed as a goodwill gesture.
Regardless anyway, as I've already said: there will be an internal complaints procedure to follow, and chances are there'll be the ability to claim compensation.

They didnt actually cause you any monetary loss though did they? (Other than petrol back and fourth).
In all honesty, just let it drop, they didnt make any matters worse or cause any damage, they've merely set you back a few days. It's hardly worth pursuing in my eyes, however as I say, if you feel otherwise - follow the complaints procedure.
 

GrandmaD

New Member
Feb 18, 2013
4
0
0
I'm fully aware of S.13 SOGSA. However what I'm saying is, in order for a contract to exist there must be: 1. An offer , 2. Acceptance , 3. Consideration

The offer exists, the acceptance exists, however there is no consideration on your part.

If by all means you had paid for them to sort out your issues, and the issues weren't resolved, then and only then you'd have a case under S.13 . However I think you'll struggle to prove a contract exists when there is no consideration, this instance would merely be classed as a goodwill gesture.
Regardless anyway, as I've already said: there will be an internal complaints procedure to follow, and chances are there'll be the ability to claim compensation.

They didnt actually cause you any monetary loss though did they? (Other than petrol back and fourth).
In all honesty, just let it drop, they didnt make any matters worse or cause any damage, they've merely set you back a few days. It's hardly worth pursuing in my eyes, however as I say, if you feel otherwise - follow the complaints procedure.
That's where I'm confused. I took my car in for the blowers etc. They carried out other work they identified which I paid for. They made no charge for the original work.

So does this mean using my brakes scenario. If I took my car in for say a new exhaust. They identified brakes work but only charged me for the exhaust. Those brakes were faulty or poorly fitted I would have no legal recourse under the sogosa?

I find that hard to believe.

Oh they did more than inconvenience me. My car when it overheated could've resulted in more serious and costly damage.
 

ALewis

Moderator
Nov 23, 2010
691
4
0
South Wales
Ill put this as simple as I can.

Contract:
(Offer) : I'll fix your brakes for £20
(Acceptance): Ok then
(Consideration): Brakes fixed, £20 handed over.

The above is a contract for services covered by Part II of SOGSA 1982.
If the repair wasn't right, and the brakes weren't fixed, you'd have a claim under S.13 .

The situation with blowers etc:
(Offer): ill have a look and see what's needed
(Acceptance): Ok
(Consideration): new part fitted/clean out - it's only a minor job, don't worry about it. **note, no consideration from you**

No contract exists. In fact, you could say it's an unconditional gift.

Inconvenienced by needing to stop the vehicle to cool down - that's unfortunate, of course it is, but no damage was actually done, therefore you've had no monetary losses to recover.
How do you put a cost on needing to pull over? ... That's something for yourself and halfords to argue out.

If this doesn't make sense, ill do it again but apply it to another scenario.
 

GrandmaD

New Member
Feb 18, 2013
4
0
0
I hear what you're saying. What I can't get my head around is the fact you're saying there's no legal recourse within the act in this scenario. So taking what you've said my 'free work' on the brakes scenario which could result in a crash has no legal recourse because the work was done for free. Are you suggesting any work done for free has no legal recourse within the supply of goods of services act has no legal recourse. Because I've been told otherwise by an adviser from this organisations helpline number.
 

ALewis

Moderator
Nov 23, 2010
691
4
0
South Wales
Absolutely. I am saying that you have no recourse under this Act, and I shall show that whoever has advised you as such is incorrect.

As previously stated, you have no legally formed contract, for either goods or services. Which rules out SOGSA completely, and same goes for SOGA.

If in your scenario, free work was carried out and this work was the causal link for an RTA / an injury, you would have a claim under Common Law - namely the Law of Negligence, whereby Halfords would've failed you with their duty of care.

Do you believe me yet, or am I still wrong?