60% percent
Find Out How
Read How
Latest News

Clients are already benefitting as a result of a proven high court process to secure refunds on equipment leases.

Here is a case study of a successful outcome from Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd which was handled by
Guildhall Chambers.

Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd v Purfleet Office Systems Ltd, 2010 presided over by HHJ Seymour QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court

Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd are a charity who had entered into leasing agreements with Purfleet Office Systems Ltd for five photocopiers. The leases were funded by asset finance agreements with leasing houses. Osteopathic Education and Research committed to a significantly more expensive leasing package than average because they were told the deal meant they would receive a monthly marketing support payment from the photocopier manufacturer.

So whilst they understood they were paying an above average monthly fee for their photocopier, when weighing up the money they were due to receive from the photocopier manufacturer they believed overall they were achieving cost savings.

In fact, the marketing support payment received each month by Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd was not provided by the photocopier manufacturer, but provided by the leasing company who had factored the marketing support payment into the original lease, which in turn was subject to finance charges.

The outcome was that Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd essentially ended up repaying the marketing support payments to the leasing houses as part of its rental obligation. In consequence, the charity ended up with a five-year liability of close to 1 million for the hire of five photocopiers. In a 2010 court case Osteopathic Education and Research Ltd was awarded over 660,000 for Purfleet Office Systems for misrepresentation and breach of contract.

Have you entered into a contract to lease office equipment in your workplace?
Have you been charged an over inflated price?
Do you feel your agreement does not reflect what you thought you had agreed too?
Is your equipment fit for the purpose?
tick Were you offered marketing or equipment incentives? (This may have been added to your lease)