THE FURNITURE OMBUDSMAN
(formerly Qualitas)
31 July 2007 UPDATE The
Furniture Ombudsman emailed me today to tell me they
disagree with some of the information on this page. Their
email is at the bottom of the page in Purple (this colour).
My words below (in blue) contain some of my opinions so, in
the interests of fairness, please also read the Furniture
Ombudsman's email.
Until recently, if you were unlucky enough to have invited
a Moben salesperson into your home, they would almost
certainly have told you that you would be protected by an
'independent' conciliation, arbitration and adjudication
body called 'Qualitas'. They would tell you this to
alleviate any concerns you may have about paying in full
for your kitchen on delivery rather than after
installation.
When things went seriously wrong with my kitchen I
contacted Qualitas via their website to ask them how to
start their process. They responded that they would contact
me. About a year has gone by and I'm still waiting.
Earlier this year, Qualitas changed its name; it is
now
'The Furniture
Ombudsman'.
I'll refer
to it as 'FO' for short.
Moben salespersons now refer to the FO instead of to
Qualitas.
I've had a good look through the FO's website and it seems
to me that there is no way that it's independent. The FO is
financed by members of the furniture industry and it's
quite clear that it's primary purpose is to assist its
members to limit their liability to the absolute minimum.
It's there to help companies such as Moben; it's not there
to help customers. Sometimes the help to companies can be
beneficial to customers, but that's a secondary effect not
the prime purpose.
I've read a lot written by Moben customers about their view
of Qualitas and the FO; I don't recall any of it being
complementary. Most of it was critical of the protracted
process and the way in which Qualitas/FO calculated
compensation.
I've recently been provided with a copy of letters from the
FO to a disgruntled Moben customer. They're very useful as
they clearly spell out the ridiculous way that compensation
is calculated. Here is an extract of the parts of one
letter that are not specific to the particular case and are
therefore of general interest; I've put some of it in bold
to draw attention to the most outrageous parts :
......Primarily my
role is to ensure that the injured party
is
not out of pocket.
Compensation will only be considered where it arises as a
natural breach of the contract; any losses must be
reasonably forseeable by both parties.
A breach of contract alone is not grounds for
compensation, the claimant must show that a financial loss
has been suffered due directly to that breach.
The party
suffering the loss must show that they have taken action to
keep their losses to a minimum. No party can profit from a
breach of contract, but can claim for genuine and
reasonable losses. Any claim should, in the main, be
quantifiable.
Compensation can be awarded for loss of annual holiday
entitlement if the consumer has not been given reasonable
notice of cancellation (3 days) so they can return to work
or make alternative use of their time.
Also taken into consideration is whether there was
anyone else who could have been present without them
entailing a loss of this nature.
This sum will not exceed £50 per day.
In order
to consider any claim fully we will require details of the
actual dates taken,
notification of the occupations of all those in the
household who work, and whether the
claimant took part of his or her annual leave entitlement.
Please note that
we consider a claim for loss of income from someone who
is self employed to be a business claim and therefore
outside our re-mit. However we would
consider making an exception for any such claim that did
not exceed £50 per day.
To enable me to consider this aspect of the claim, I
require employer statements confirming the dates taken as
annual leave.
As
a general rule compensation for delay and inconvenience per
se would not be awarded save in exceptional
cases. For instance it would
not be awarded in the type of cases where an installation
was delayed a week or two, or where there was a broken
delivery appointment. On the other hand if it was known, by
both parties, that the installation had to be completed in
time for a special event such as a wedding, or if the
installation took an exceptional length of time then
compensation would be payable.
We do have the discretion to award compensation for general
inconvenience.
As a rule this amount will be in the order of a
pro-rata sum of £400 per year per adult resident who has a
financial interest in the property concerned.
The
following factors must be considered since they may justify
the award of a greater or lesser sum.
- Length of inconvenience
- Permanence of any inconvenience
- Number and age of parties affected
- Contract price (is it at a premium)
We will also consider any reasonable claim not mentioned
here in
as long as the events that caused it were reasonably
forseeable and due to the
de-fault of the other party. Please provide
dates and documentary evidence (receipts, employer's
statement etc) of any financial loss or expense
incurred.
I shall look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Yours sincerely...
I'll let you decide whether or not the above extract is
what you would hope to see from an 'independent' resolution
dispute service!
31 July UPDATE - Here's the FO's email :
Dear
Sir
I
have recently had my attention drawn to your web
site www.kitchenhell.co.uk
and
I write to clarify some misconceptions and errors detailed
in the section regarding The Furniture
Ombudsman.
The
Furniture Ombudsman is an independent dispute resolution
service. It is a non-governmental funded service,
part-funded by the industry through a registration scheme,
and part funded by consultancy work e.g. work for
solicitors’ firms and consumers. Our work is
overseen by an independent body of representatives drawn
not just from industry but also from Trading Standards and
consumer groups, who ensure that all decisions made are
balanced and impartial. It is important to understand that
our function is not to represent clients, rather, to serve
as an impartial arbiter of disputes.
Whilst
a dispute resolution service such as The Furniture
Ombudsman is an alternative to the court system, our
decisions are based on established legal principles and
precedents, and this includes the way in which compensation
is calculated.
The
Furniture Ombudsman service is available to Moben customers
and if you wish to avail yourself of the service, you
should contact administration for an application form on
0870 1620690.
In
relation to the “disgruntled” customer you
mention, I will happily investigate any issues if you would
let me know his/her details or alternatively advise them to
contact me.
I
trust this clarifies the function of The Furniture
Ombudsman and that you will correct your web site
accordingly.
Yours
faithfully
Rhianwen
Roberts
Head
of Service
The
Furniture Ombudsman
Direct
dial: 01438 777 706
Switchboard:
0870 1620690
Fax:
01438 777 800
E-mail:
rroberts@thefurnitureombudsman.org
'The
sign of fair trading in the Furniture
Industry'
www.thefurnitureombudsman.org
Maxwell
Road, Stevenage, Herts, SG1 2EW, UK