Paid about half quoted price for kitchen. Now they want more before they fit it.


I couldn't agree more. What a disgraceful way to treat a poster on this forum. Lots of companies have folded while taking deposits. I am sure that this is not the case with this company but it has happened in the past. It is not unreasonable for the OP to want to know if the expensive goods have arrived before handing over payment.
Another one lost to "Boards"?
 
Grizzly said:
Lots of companies have folded while taking deposits. I am sure that this is not the case with this company but it... is not unreasonable for the OP to want to know if the expensive goods have arrived before handing over payment.
Click to expand...

Well put Grizzly, an excellent point.
 
This is the point I tried to make albeit in a roundabout fashion. And I reiterate the point that no aspersions should be made against this company concerned, but in reality in these times cognizance has to be made of the wider marketplace.
 
It was highly unfair of the OP to name the company and then proceed to cast aspersions on them in the manner they did.
 

Hi Grizzly

She has already been asked a number of times about the payment terms and she has not answered the question.

As Luternau has pointed out

people pay lots of companies for these in advance of delivery all the time-so doing so is nothing groundbreaking)
Click to expand...

If she has already paid for the appliances, she is raising a complete red herring as she can do nothing about it. She has parted with her money for them and the only issue is the fitting of the kitchen units. She should pay for them in accordance with her contract - not before or not after.

If she has not paid for the appliances, and the ones she has ordered are not delivered, of course she should not pay for them.

I will stress yet again, that she is complaining about something before it has happened. To me that is completely unreasonable. And doing it about a named company is potentially defamatory.

This is not Joe Duffy. The customer is not always right and reasonable. If customers are unreasonable, they will be challenged.

Another one lost to "Boards"?
Click to expand...
I suspect that she would be challenged in exactly the same way on boards.
 
But from my reading of it she will have paid for the appliances AND the kitchen bar €517 euros before she sees anything ! The OP is dead right to ascertain what she has ordered is what she is going to get ! That's all she was doing but being ignored by the company

You haven't read the post correctly Brendan and your response is quite unfair


QUOTE>>If she has not paid for the appliances, and the ones she has ordered are not delivered, of course she should not pay for them
 
Op - I don't think you were being unreasonable either, but I hope by now all is sorted.

I too would be more than a little annoyed if someone arrived to fit a kitchen that has been order weeks ago, took out the old kitchen and then left you without the correct appliances.
So - I agree - you were correct to push the suppliers on whether the goods were available or not.

To the other dissenters who think you are being unreasonable - i don't agree with you - the OP has every right to query the availability of a critical item - this is a cooker which the OP knows had a long lead time when she tried to order directly, so if the kitchen supplier doesn't have it, there is no chance of them placing a rush order and delivering/fitting on time.

The closest analogy I can think of is if you order a car with a Leather seat upgrade and the car is delivered without any seats at all - pretty useless, similar to a kitchen without appliances.
 
nai and others

She still has not told us what the payment terms agreed in her contract were.

She is right to check on the morning of delivery, that all the correct items are there. I have had the wrong stuff delivered on two occasions and when I pointed it out they were taken back and the right stuff was delivered. This happens a lot. It's annoying, but we don't live in a perfect world.

It's up to her if she wants to check if the appliances have arrived in stock. The company should have responded to her calls and emails.

She probably should have specified in her contract that the appliances be delivered ahead of the installation, so she could check them.

She is not right to imply in her thread title that the supplier was demanding money earlier than agreed. This is what caught my attention as I assumed it was true and this company was trying to get money in early as they were in difficulty.
She was not right to name the company.
She is certainly not right to try to cancel the kitchen a few days before it was delivered.


There seems to be an assumption that the customer is always right and reasonable and that the supplier is always wrong and unreasonable.
 
"I will stress yet again, that she is complaining about something before it has happened. To me that is completely unreasonable. And doing it about a named company is potentially defamatory.

This is not Joe Duffy. The customer is not always right and reasonable. If customers are unreasonable, they will be challenged".


Brendan, I agree entirely with your sentiments above. We have also heard from only one side (customer).

Since the kitchen was to be installed last Tuesday, am I the only one thinking the lack of further information from the OP seems quite strange?
 
Why would you think it strange, there's no obligation to report back?

>>
Since the kitchen was to be installed last Tuesday, am I the only one thinking the lack of further information from the OP seems quite strange?[/QUOTE]
 
There is no obligation to report back, but it is surely a matter of courtesy that after seeking advice here, the OP should post how things went with the supplier, whenever she gets a moment. Maybe she is wrecked with food prep, baking and cooking!
 
Brendan I agree with your general point that the OP should operate within the contract signed and that there should not be an assumption here that the company has done anything wrong. It would be good if the OP could come back and wrap up this thread now that the installation date has passed.
However I find it very disappointing that once again you cannot make an argument without name calling and then failing to apologize for same. A point can be made without resorting to insulting the other party.
 
 
Last edited:
Ceist Beag said:
However I find it very disappointing that once again you cannot make an argument without name calling and then failing to apologize for same. A point can be made without resorting to insulting the other party.
Click to expand...

I also thought that this was awful as well. Going back over a person's history to use it against them. I wasn't surprised though.
 


Brendan - I agree with you about the title - but on this forum you can edit titles as you see fit - why not do that ?

Anyway - my thoughts - in this case the supplier is/was being unreasonable.

OP has stated that they have not responded to emails or phone calls
Calling into the company & speaking to manager also was to no avail
Document that she was shown by person responsible for ordering was for a different kitchen than the one she confirmed order on.

OP is not disputing that she has to pay - she was questioning whether she has any comeback if they don't deliver - big difference.

Also - she has not tried to cancel - I take it that she made a throwaway remark on an internet forum that she's sick of the carry on and would like to cancel.
 
Ceist Beag said:
However I find it very disappointing that once again you cannot make an argument without name calling and then failing to apologize for same. A point can be made without resorting to insulting the other party.
Click to expand...

Kimmagegirl said:
I also thought that this was awful as well. Going back over a person's history to use it against them.
Click to expand...

Brendan you addressed a post to me but I really have nothing further to add than what I have already posted. I don't feel the need to go through the OP's post history. The above posters have summarised my feeling on this thread.
 
I agree with Vanilla and her summary, I usually stay away from any kind of "observational commentry" on posts but I have to say I too am disheartened (but as another poster said - not surprised) by the heavy handedness of some of these responses, the OP is not "uptight", they are investing a lot of money in a fundamental part of their house and want to be sure they are getting what they specified before handing over the cash. I don't see how this is in any way odd. Hopefully the kitchen arrived safely with all the correct appliances and the OP is happily enjoying their new room. I'm sure they'll post back at some stage to let us know how it went.
 
This is a decidedly odd story.

It's defamatory - which is a huge concern for me.
She complains about a service before it is delivered.
She won't answer the question about paying for it.
And because of this, she wants to cancel the contract. Maybe this is a throwaway comment, but I have to deal with what she writes.

I can't apologise for classifying this as "odd". It is not normal.

If this had been a first time poster, a moderator would have hit the delete button immediately. We don't allow defamatory comments.

If a Frequent Poster with a record of balanced comment, makes a factual type post, we tend to take it at face value.

I checked her previous posts to see what sort of poster she has been.

Whether you like it or not, she has a record of questionable complaints. And then complaints about posters who dared question her complaints. The plasterer one is the most revealing if you care to look at it. Not only is she unhappy with the plasterer, but in her own words "He was recommended by someone who was recommended here on askaboutmoney and I feel let down by the site."

There is no pleasing some people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register