Defendant puts the claimant to strict proof

[bulb763]

What exactly does this mean I have to do (I am the claimant)?

This relates to a claim I am bringing against a supplier who refused to accept a return under the DSR. Part of their defence is the following line:

"The Defendant also believes that the Claimant has registered the owner's Warranty which would disentitle him to rely on the DSR in any event and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof on this matter."

Thanks

[bulb763]

It's just the "strict proof" bit I don't understand, I've already been through the warranty stuff.

Thanks Justin. Quite right - same problem

[bulb763]

It's just the "strict proof" bit I don't understand, I've already been through the warranty stuff.

Thanks Justin. Quite right - same problem

[bulb763]

JustinP1 said:

bulb763 said:

It's just the "strict proof" bit I don't understand, I've already been through the warranty stuff.

Thanks Justin. Quite right - same problem

Specifically, what you mean to satisfy this in the 'strict proof', is prove that you gave the notice. You would probably be best doing this in the form of a witness statement backed up by the document.

Further to that I would simply add (as I believe you had explained it) that you did not accept the goods, and indeed the only reason you rang up for technical help was because you were unhappy with the goods, and in the course of that the only way you could get this manufacturer help was to give the serial number of the product. When the manufacturer confirmed the issue with the monitor you exerted your right to cancel the contract with the retailer.

That fact actually supports your case.

Doing what you have done does not mean you lose your legal rights as all. If they did, a document as easy to understand as the DSRs would say so.

Reading between the lines the seller knows he is bang to rights. However, if he takes the matter formally and asks a judge to look at the case formally, you would need to present the 'evidence' of cancelation, which should be as a witness statement properly disclosed to him before trial. His loophole is if you don't do this, you have no admissible evidence in trial, and your claim fails.

Witness statements? You're not saying that I need to find someone who actually watched me "pen" the email and saw me click "send" are you? He has replied directly to my cancellation email - wouldn't this be enough evidence that I had sent it correctly and that he had received it?