Examination of the quality of the interior door installation. Examination of doors from the company LLC "tvims project. Possible defects in door structures

1. Where to apply for the examination of entrance and interior doors?

1.1. To conduct an independent examination, you can contact any expert organization and get an expert opinion. Good luck.

1.2. Contact an expert organization that conducts an examination of the quality of goods or the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of your city.

1.3. Call the expert organizations in your city that conduct the relevant examinations. This information is also available on the Internet.

1.4. Kirov has a huge number of expert institutions. Almost all of them have websites. Open the Internet, choose the one that suits you in the price segment and contact us. Your merchandising examination of doors is not complicated, so you do not need any special expert institution. If, for example, we were talking about a handwriting examination or an examination of the severity of harm to health, then your difficulties would be understandable. And so, this question should not cause any difficulties.

Examination of doors is a general study of their consumer properties. Independent is carried out in order to protect the rights and interests of the customer doors, as well as persons selling these doors. Such an examination can be carried out regardless of how new the design is, since with the same success it is possible to carry out an examination for a used door. This type of study is carried out to establish the safety of the door structure in accordance with accepted standard rules.

The low quality of the material, together with an error in the preparation of drawings, as well as during installation work, affect the further operation of the product. Therefore, during the provision of services, during which examination of the quality of doors, qualified experts examine the level of quality of the material used for the manufacture of the door structure, the scheme of the door, and also how correctly it was made installation work. Also, specialists must determine the causes of defects on the doors, if any, with the calculation of the percentage of deterioration in the quality of the door installation.

Research door structures relevant not only in cases where buyers need to identify the correctness of the installation of products, but also, if necessary, determine their real market value, when conducting a construction and technical expertise. A specialist in the provision of services of this kind of expertise can determine whether special work is required to repair and restore the door structure, and how much it will cost from a material point of view.

Examination of doors begins to be carried out after direct contact with a similar statement by the customer-buyer. After the expert receives at his disposal the necessary list of available documents, he begins to collect regulatory material as a "toolkit" for further independent examination. After the work has been completed, the persons who have requested an examination receive a special document describing the conformity of the door structure, or its non-compliance, in accordance with established standards.

Independent expertise of interior doors

When it comes to conducting an independent examination of interior door structures, a check with a refutation or confirmation of the following factors comes to the fore:

compliance with all necessary rules according to GOST and guidelines;
the appropriate ratio of cost and quality of the door;
the degree of environmental and sanitary indicators of materials used in the manufacture of the door structure;
aspect ratio interior door;
the presence of error-free connections of the necessary parts of the product;
the required level of stiffness of the ribs.

For manufacturers of interior doors, before the start of mass production, an examination with the identification of the above factors is necessary condition. During such a study, design flaws can be identified, which in turn contribute to the withdrawal of this product from production.

This expertise is beneficial and useful also for potential buyers. First of all, it can give a guarantee of purchasing a quality product. In practice, it sometimes happens that an already assembled structure does not meet the criteria previously specified by the manufacturer. Thus, this examination can help the buyer to return the funds spent on the purchase of interior doors.

Technical expertise of the front door

Sometimes it happens that there are disputes between door sellers and their buyers regarding the quality of the goods. In such situations, each party needs objective assessments of door structures by independent experts. How special case a similar assessment of experts is resorted to during the technical examination of the front door.

Independent expertise input metal door usually involves the following questions:

is there a visible defect on the door;
Is it possible to see a hidden marriage on the structure.

Qualitative examination of door installation

At the stage of installation of door structures, most defects are detected, which at first glance are very difficult to see. How competently and correctly the installation of the structure is carried out depends on how reliable and efficient it will be in the future. Therefore, conducting an examination of the door installation is an extremely important opportunity for a potential buyer.

Our main products:

Independent expertise - a study of some object, conducted by a qualified expert in order to establish significant parameters and properties of this object. When conducting an examination, a specialist is guided by knowledge in the field of science and technology, competencies in the field of art and craft. Conducting both independent and forensic examinations assumes the absence of the influence of third parties on the results obtained.

Forensic examination is characterized by a special procedural status and is carried out in connection with the consideration of criminal, civil, administrative and arbitration cases. Forensic examination is regulated by the provisions of procedural codes and laws.

In our opinion, it is not correct to draw a hard line between the concepts of judicial and independent expertise, since the legal status of expertise does not entail a change in the applied methods and quality requirements.

01 / 07

Handwriting expertise

consultation

Handwriting expertise is one of the most priority activities of the company. The staff of experts is represented by specialists with work experience from 11 to 35 years. We undertake the most complex studies and use both traditional and the most modern methodological base.

The conclusions are accepted by all courts without exception. in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the conclusion of an expert / specialist is one of the types of evidence. We are always ready to confirm our conclusions on the conclusion in any instance.

Any individual or entity. In order to conduct a forensic examination, it is necessary to submit an appropriate petition to the court with the application of information about Expert and Consulting Center "Grafo-Logos" LLC. We provide such information (an information letter and a set of documents) upon your request.

We are ready to offer our clients the shortest terms and loyal prices.

In the case of examining copies of documents, and not originals, the interaction process can be carried out remotely.

This type examination traditionally solves 2 main types of tasks: 1) identification (personal identification), in the course of which questions about the belonging of a signature / record to a specific person are resolved; 2) diagnostic, during which the conditions for the execution of manuscripts are established (imitation, illness, alcohol intoxication, gender, age, etc.).
If you want to get a preliminary conclusion, we offer a "verbal consultation" service, during which we conduct a full study and inform you of the conclusion orally. The cost of the service is 50% of the cost of a full-fledged study, and if you need to issue a written opinion, you can pay the rest.

02 / 07

The object of this type of examination can be a product of absolutely any non-food product group, from shoelaces to kitchen set and bicycle. Most often, these studies are carried out in order to:

definitions quality characteristics goods;
establishing compliance with the declared parameters;
finding out the causes of defects.

When an interested person contacts our organization, first of all, he receives a preliminary consultation of a commodity specialist. At this stage, it is clarified: the task, the fundamental possibility of conducting the necessary examination, the scope of work, the need for an expert to visit. Issues that will be resolved in the process of expert research, the need for the presence of the parties are discussed. Recommendations are given on how to save the goods, further actions. Often we hold free consultations, during which we inspect the product and give an oral conclusion. To do this, you must pre-register and come to our office.

The resulting Conclusion can be used by the customer for presentation to the seller in accordance with the OZPP law. In case of refusal to return the goods and reimburse the costs, the consumer has the right to apply to the court. The act of expert research of LLC Expert and Consulting Center "Grafo-Logos" is one of the types of evidence and can be presented to any court.

Today you and I belong to the category of an ordinary consumer of goods and services, set by the norms of modern current legislation in the framework, when the process of proving one's case in a controversial issue falls on the shoulders of the consumer himself. Often, the process of proving one's innocence stems from non-compliance with the norms of the law "On the Protection of Consumer Rights" on the part of sellers and manufacturers. In general, such a scheme inevitably forms the principle of competitiveness of the parties in litigation arising from disputes. And here it is important to understand that this very principle allows you not to be led by the "offenders".

Be vigilant when choosing a supplier of goods and services!!! Read reviews, ask for product documentation, visit production!!!

03 / 07

Laboratory research and testing

consultation

The work of the Grafo-Logos Expertise Center in this direction is based on the knowledge, qualifications and extensive experience of our employees, in addition, it is provided with a modern material and technical base. This allows us to cover a very wide field of application of laboratory testing, using methods: IR spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, molecular absorption spectrophotometry, differential scanning calorimetry, thermal gravimetric analysis, etc.

We are ready to offer a wide range of tested indicators for the following types of substances and materials:

gasoline, diesel fuel and motor oils;
polymers;
metals;
fabrics;
paper;
- reagents.

We do not research food and biological substances.

Tests are carried out in accredited laboratories, and the result is expressed in the form of a Conclusion and a test report. In the areas of "polymers" and "paper", our specialists use the most modern laboratory facilities, however, they do not have accreditation certificates.

04 / 07

IMPORTANT!!!

Experts of the Expert and Consulting Center "Grafo-Logos" conduct a "review" of the conclusions only if there are valid:

violations of the methodological requirements for the performance of a certain type of research;
procedural violations;
inconsistencies between the course of the study and the results obtained;
unreliable, unfounded and untrue conclusions.

The decision to accept the materials provided by you for review is made by the expert only after their full study and analysis.

We urge you to be vigilant in choosing an expert or an expert institution (organization).

05 / 07

Examination of counterfeit products

consultation

This type of examination is aimed at establishing signs of the use of someone else's trademark in the manufacture of products. Most often, unscrupulous entrepreneurs use someone else's brand not for new (unique) products, but copy existing products as accurately as possible.

The research is carried out by a group of effective specialists, which includes experts, patent attorneys, marketers, and sociologists. We use our own collections of samples of legitimate products and constantly accumulate our knowledge about specific products through direct dialogue with copyright holders and through certification. Today our company is known to many business representatives as a professional in its field. We are trusted and we are improving.

Who needs expertise?

Brand owners. For them, this is a way of proving the facts of illegal encroachments on intellectual property and bringing the perpetrators to justice established by law. Such work leads to a reduction in financial losses, and an increase in the degree of trust in the brand and product quality;

Law enforcement agencies. Forensic divisions of the Ministry of Internal Affairs practically do not engage in such research. Turning to us executive makes a decision on the appointment of an examination, and we acquire a procedural status;

Consumers ( individuals). Most often, the service is needed by those who have already purchased some kind of product and after some time doubted its quality. However, often the consumer voluntarily and consciously chooses a "branded" fake. He does not need to understand the signs of difference, since its cost in relation to the original is 100-350% lower, which speaks for itself.

The fight against counterfeit products has become a global trend, and in this sense, we sincerely believe that each of us should be very careful about the choice of purchased products. Are you sure that the Construction Materials Or are the parts for your car original? We are not, especially when in our Conclusion we conclude that there are signs of counterfeit brake pads ...

06 / 07

Surveyor services and inspection control

consultation

Studies aimed at determining the characteristics of a cargo or product, including:
Qualitative characteristics (identification, shape, size, composition, color, content, classification and group affiliation, etc.);

Quantitative characteristics (volume, quantity, content of the whole in parts, etc.);
The condition of the goods, packaging, containers, wagons, transport (damage, defects, conditions of transportation and storage, etc.);
Loading / unloading control (identification, documentation, packaging, marking, product proximity, strength characteristics, etc.);
Laboratory studies (sampling, tests for compliance with the declared characteristics)

Goods are identified at any stage of the inspection. The amount of information established and recorded during the inspection can be used by the appraiser to determine the cost characteristics without additional visits.

The competitive advantage of our company is that we provide these services from the position of a forensic organization. This means that we use a full-fledged methodology from the field of merchandising, traceability, fire and construction technical, auto technical expertise. Each specialist has a special education and deep experience in working with a specific product group. Thus, the Conclusion issued based on the results of the study is a type of evidence, and not the opinion of a specialist. In addition, we do not need to collect samples for transfer to the laboratory, as We do our own laboratory research.

Choose a court 12 Arbitration Court of Appeal, Saratov 13 Arbitration Court of Appeal, St. Petersburg 14 Arbitration Court of Appeal, Vologda 15 Arbitration Court of Appeal, Rostov-on-Don 16 Arbitration Court of Appeal, Essentuki 17 Arbitration Court of Appeal, Perm 20 Arbitration Court of Appeal 9 Arbitration Court of Appeal in Moscow Arbitration Court of the Trans-Baikal Territory Arbitration Court of the Amur Region Arbitration Court of the Astrakhan Region Arbitration Court of the Belgorod Region Arbitration Court of the Volgograd Region Arbitration Court of the Vologda Region Arbitration Court of the Voronezh Region Arbitration Court of Moscow Arbitration Court of the Kaliningrad Region Arbitration Court Arbitration Court of the Kaluga Region Arbitration Court of the Kamchatka Territory Arbitration Court of the Krasnodar Territory Arbitration Court of the Kursk Region Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region Arbitration Court of the Murmansk Region Arbitration Court of the Nizhny Novgorod Region Arbitration Court of the Novgorod Region Arbitration Court of the Omsk Region Arbitration Court of the Oryol Region Arbitration Court of the Perm Territory Arbitration Court of the Pskov Region Arbitration Court of the Republic of Karelia Arbitration Court of the Republic of Komi Arbitration Court of the Republic of Tatarstan Arbitration Court of the Republic of Khakassia Arbitration Court of the Ryazan Region. Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and Leningrad region Arbitration Court of the Sakhalin Region Arbitration Court of the Tver Region Arbitration Court of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug-Yugra Arbitration Court of the Chelyabinsk Region Arbitration Court of the Chuvash Republic - Chuvashia Arbitration Court of the Yaroslavl Region Atyuryevsky District Court of the Republic of Mordovia Ashinsky City Court of the Chelyabinsk Region Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow Balashikhinsky City Court Moscow Region Basmany District Court of Moscow Birobidzhansky District Court of the Jewish Autonomous Region Blagoveshchensky City Court Boksitogorsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Borovichsky District Court of the Novgorod Region Buynaksky City Court of the Republic of Dagestan Valdaisky District Court of the Novgorod Region Vasileostrovskiy District Court of St. Petersburg Velikoluksky Court of the Pskov Region Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia Supreme Court Russian Federation Vidnovsky City Court Vichugsky City Court of the Ivanovo Region Vologda City Court of the Vologda Region Vologda Regional Court Volosovsky District Court of the Leningrad Region Volkhov City Court of the Leningrad Region Vorkuta City Court of the Komi Republic Voskresensky City Court of the Moscow Region Votkinsky District Court of the Udmurt Republic Vsevolozhsk City Court of the Leningrad Region Vyborg City Court of the Leningrad Region Vyborgsky District Court of St. Petersburg Gagarinsky District Court of Moscow Gatchinsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Gdovsky District Court of the Pskov Region Georgievsky City Court of the Stavropol Territory Traffic Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for the Kirovsky District of the Leningrad Region court of Moscow Gorny judicial district of the city of Vorkuta of the Republic of Komi of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region Gurevsky District Court of the Kaliningrad Region Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal of Moscow Dedovichisky District Court of the Pskov Region Dzerzhinsky District Court of Orenburg Dzerzhinsky District Court St. Petersburg Domodedovo City Court Dorogomilovsky District Court of Moscow Yegoryevsky City Court of Moscow Region Zheleznodorozhny City Court of Moscow Region Zhukovsky City Court of Moscow Region Zadneprovsky District Court of Smolensk Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow Zelenogorsky District Court of St. Petersburg Zelenogradsky District Court of Moscow Zyuzinsky District Court of Moscow Ivanteevsky City Court of the Moscow Region Industrial District Court of Izhevsk (Udmurt Republic) Istra City Court Kalininsky District Court of St. Petersburg Kalininsky District Court of Ufa RB Kemsky City Court of the Republic of Karelia Kievsky District Court City of Simferopol of the Republic of Crimea Kingiseppsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Kirishsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Kirovsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Kirovsky District Court of Yaroslavl Kirovsky District Court of St. Petersburg Knyazhpogostsky District Court of the Republic of Komi Kolpinsky District Court of St. Petersburg Kondopoga City Court of the Republic of Karelia Royal City Court Kostomukshsky City Court of the Republic of Karelia Krasnogvardeisky District Court St. Petersburg Krasnogorsky City Court of the Moscow Region Krasnoselsky District Court St. Petersburg Kronstadtsky District Court St. Petersburg Kuzminsky District Court Moscow Kuibyshevsky District Court St. Petersburg Kuntsevsky District Court Moscow Kutuzovsky Judicial District Syktyvkar Lakhdenpokhsky District Court of the Republic of Karelia Leningrad Regional Court Leninsky District Court Vladikavkaz RNO-Alania Leninsky District Court St. Petersburg Lefortovsky District Court Moscow Lobnensky City Court of the Moscow Region Lodeynopolsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Lomonosovsky District Court of St. Petersburg Lomonosovsky District Court of the Leningrad Region Luzhsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Lytkarinsky City Court of the Moscow Region Lyubertsy City Court of the Moscow Region Lyublinsky District Court of Moscow Maikop City Court of the Republic Adygeya Medvezhyegorsky District Court of the Republic of Karelia Meshchansky District Court of Moscow Magistrate Court Section No. 57 of the Podporozhsky District of the Leningrad Region Moscow City Court Moscow Regional Court of the Moscow District Court of St. Petersburg Nagatinsky District Court of Moscow Naro-Fomisky City Court of the Moscow Region Nevsky District Court St. Petersburg Nikulinsky District Court Novgorod City Court of the Novgorod Region Novgorod Regional Court Novgorodsky District Court of the Novgorod Region Noginsk City Court of the Moscow Region Norilsk City Court Krasnoyarsk Territory Traffic Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Podporozhsky District Traffic Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Vyborgsky District of St. Petersburg Traffic Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Vyborgsky District of St. Petersburg Oktyabrsky District Court of Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan Oktyabrsky District Court, Syktyvkar, Republic of Komi Okulovsky District Court, Novgorod Region, Olonetsky District Court, Republic of Karelia, Olonetsky District Court, Republic of Karelia, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for the Krestetsky District, Novgorod Region, Ordzhonikidzevsky District Court, Ekaterenburg, Ordynsky District Court, Novosibirsk Ostankinsky District Court of Moscow Pereslavsky District Court of the Yaroslavl Region Perovsky District Court of Moscow Pestovsky District Court of the Novgorod Region Petrogradsky District Court of St. Petersburg Petrodvortsovy District Court of St. Petersburg Petrozavodsk City Court of the Republic of Karelia Pechora City Court of the Republic of Komi Pitkyarantsky City Court of the Republic of Karelia Podolsky City Court of the Moscow Region Podporozhsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Poronaysky City Court of the Sakhalin Region Pravoberezhny District Court of Magnitogorsk, Chelyabinsk Region Preobrazhensky District Court of Moscow Presnensky District Court of Moscow Primorsky District Court of St. Petersburg Priozersky City Court Leningrad Region Prionezhsky District Court of the Republic of Karelia Pronsky District Court of the Ryazan Region Pskov City Court of the Pskov Region Pushkinsky City Court of the Moscow Region Pushkinsky District Court of St. Petersburg Ramensky City Court of the Moscow Region Reutov City Court of the Moscow Region Rybinsk City Court of the Yaroslavl Region Rybnovsky District Court of the Ryazan Region Savelovsky District Court of Moscow St. Petersburg City Court of St. Petersburg Svetlogorsky City Court of the Kaliningrad Region Severodvinsky City Court of the Arkhangelsk Region Sestroretsky District Court of St. Petersburg Simonovsky District Court of Moscow Slantsevsky City Court of the Leningrad Region Investigation Department Investigative Committee for the Leningrad Region Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the city of Petrozavodsk Investigation Department for the Republic of Dagestan Investigation Department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Novgorod Region Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Vasileostrovsky District Investigation Department for the city of Kingisepp of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Leningrad Region Investigation Department for the Kolpinsky District of the State Investigative Committee of the Investigative Committee Russian Federation for St. Petersburg Investigation Department for the Krasnogvardeisky District of St. Petersburg Investigation Department for the Moskovsky District of the State Investigation Department for St. Petersburg of the Investigative Committee of Russia Investigation Department for the city of Gatchina Investigation Department of the Investigative Committee of Russia for the Leningrad Region Podporozhsky District, Leningrad Region, Soltsky District Court, Solnechnogorsk City Court, Moscow Region, Solntsevsky District Court, Moscow, Sortavalsky City Court, Republic of Karelia, Sosnovoborsk City Court, Leningrad Region, Starorussky District Court, Novgorod Region, Administration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Admiralteysky District of St. Petersburg, Administration of the Administration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Vasileostrovsky District of St. Petersburg, the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Krasnoselsky District of St. Petersburg Court district of Vorkuta Court district of Gatchina Court district of Kemsky district of the Republic of Karelia Court district of Kuratovsky Syktyvkar Court district of the Olonets district of the Republic of Karelia Court district of the Pitkyarantsky district of the Republic of Karelia Court district of the Pryazhinsky district of the Republic of Karelia Court district No. 1 of the Admiralteisky district of St. Petersburg Court district No. 1 of the Vologda region Court district No. 1 Boksitogorsk, Leningrad region 1, Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Court District No. 1, Serov, Sverdlovsk Region, Court District, No. 1, Segezhsky District, Republic of Karelia, Court District, Ustyansky District, Arkhangelsk Region, Court District, No. 2, Admiralteisky District, St. precinct No. 2 of the Borovichsky judicial district of the Novgorod region Judicial precinct No. 2 of the city of Votkinsk, Udmurt Republic Judicial precinct No. 2 of the city of Kostomuksha Republic of Karelia Karelia Court district No. 3 of the Admiralteisky district St. Petersburg Judicial precinct No. 3 of the Apatitsky judicial district of the Murmansk region Judicial precinct No. 3 of the Bokitogorsky district of the Leningrad Region Judicial precinct No. 3 of the Borovichsky judicial district of the Novgorod region St. Petersburg Judicial precinct No. 4 of the Borovichsky district of the Novgorod region Judicial precinct No. 4 of the Volosovsky district of the Leningrad region Judicial precinct No. 4 of Petrozavodsk Judicial precinct No. 4 of the Leningrad region Judicial precinct No. 4 of the Central district of Novosibirsk 5 Court district No. 5 of the Volosovsky district of the Leningrad region Court district No. 5 of the city of Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia Court district No. 6 of the Admiralteysky district of St. Petersburg Judicial precinct No. 7 of the Admiralteisky district of St. Petersburg Judicial precinct No. 7 of the Balashikhinsky district of the Moscow region Court district No. 9 of the Volkhov district of the Leningrad Region Court district No. 9 of the Admiralteisky district Court district No. 9 of the Borovichsky judicial district of the Novgorod region Court district No. 9 of the city of Petrozavodsk Court district No. 10 of the Admiralteisky district 10 of the Chudovsky judicial district of the Novgorod region Court district No. 11 of the Valdai judicial district of the Novgorod region Court district No. 11 of the Vasileostrovsky district Court district No. 11 of the Vologda region Court district No. 12 of the Vasileostrovsky district Court district No. 12 of the Vologda District Court district No. 12, Vsevolozhsk Court district No. 12, Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia Court district No. 13, Vasileostrovsky district No. 13 of the Novgorod Region Judicial precinct No. 14 of the Vasileostrovsky district Petrozavodsk Judicial precinct No. 15 of the Vasileostrovsky district Judicial precinct No. 15 of the Vsevolozhsky district of the Leningrad region Judicial precinct No. 15 of Vologda region Judicial precinct No. 18, Vasileostrovsky district Judicial precinct No. 19 Judicial precinct No. 19, Vasileostrovsky district Judicial precinct No. 19, Leningrad region Judicial precinct No. 2, Borovichsky district, Novgorod region Court district No. 20 of the Vyborgsky district of the Leningrad region Court district No. 21 of the Vyborgsky district Court district No. 22 of the Vyborgsky district region Court district No. 24 of the Vyborgsky district Court district No. 24, Cherepovets Court district No. 24 Roschino Court district No. 25 of Vologda Court district No. 25 of the Vyborgsky district Court district No. 27 Vyborg Court district No. 27 of the Vyborgsky district Court district No. 28 of the Vyborg district Judicial district No. 30 Veliky Novgorod No. 32 Gatchina Court district No. 32 of the Gatchinsky district of the Leningrad region Court district No. 33 of the Vyborg district Court district No. 33 of Veliky Novgorod Court district No. 35 of Veliky Novgorod Court district No. 35 of the Vyborgsky district Court district No. 35 of Gatchina, Leningrad Region Court district No. 35 of the Leningrad Region Court district No. 36 Veliky Novgorod precinct No. 36 of the Domodedovo judicial district of the Moscow region Judicial precinct No. 37 of the Gatchinsky district of the Leningrad Region Judicial precinct No. 37 of the Borovichsky district of the Novgorod region Judicial precinct No. 37 of the Vyborg district Judicial precinct No. 38 of the Valdai district plot number 39 Court district No. 39 of the Kalininsky District Court district No. 39 of the Kingiseppsky District of the Leningrad Region Court district No. 39 of the Novgorodsky Judicial District of the Novgorod Region Court district No. 41 of the Kirishi district, Leningrad region Court district No. 42, Kirishi Court district No. 42 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 43, Kirishi Court district No. 43 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 44, Kirovsk 45 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 45 of the Leningrad region Court district No. 46 Kirovsk Court district No. 46 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 47 of the Volgograd region Court district No. 47 of Kirishi 48 Vologda Judicial precinct No. 48 Lodeinoye Pole Judicial precinct No. 48 of the Kalininsky district Judicial precinct No. 48 of the Lodeynopolsky district of the Leningrad region Precinct No. 51 of the Kalininsky District Judicial precinct No. 52 of the Kalininsky District Judicial precinct No. 53 of the Kalininsky District Judicial precinct No. 53 of the Leningrad Region Court district No. 56 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 56 Podporozhye Court district No. 57 of the Kalininsky district Court district No. 57 of the Podporozhsky district of the Leningrad Region No. 59 of the Kirovsky District Court plot No. 59 Priozersky Court site No. 60 of the Kirovsky District Court site No. 60 of the Leningrad Region Court site No. 61 of the Kirovsky District Court site No. 61 of the Slantsevsky District of the Leningrad Region Sosnovy Bor Judicial precinct No. 64 of the Kirovsky district Judicial precinct No. 64 Sosnovy Bor Judicial precinct No. 65 Vologda Judicial precinct No. 65 of the Kirovsky district Cherepovets Court district No. 66, Tikhvin, Leningrad Region Court district No. 66, Kirovsky district Court district No. 67, Tikhvin Court district No. 67, Kirovsky district Court district No. 68, Tikhvin, Leningrad Region Court district No. 68, Kirovsky district Court district No. 69 of the Kirovsky district Court district No. 69 of the Leningrad region, Tikhvin Court district No. 70 of the Kirovsky district Court district No. 71 of the Kirovsky district Court district No. 72 of the Kirovsky district Court district No. 74 of the Tosnensky district Court district No. 75 of the Kolpinsky district Court district No. 76 of the Vsevolozhsky district of the Leningrad region Court district No. 76 of the Kolpinsky district 78 of the Kolpinsky district Court district No. 79 of the city of Kingisepp Court district No. 79 of the Kingisepp district of the Leningrad region Court district No. 79 of the Kolpinsky district Court district No. 82 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 83 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 84 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 85 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 89 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 90 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 91 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Court district No. 92 of the Krasnogvardeisky district Judicial precinct No. 97 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 98 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 99 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 1 of the Balashikha judicial district of the Moscow region Judicial precinct No. 104 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 105 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 106 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 107 of the Krasnoselsky district Judicial precinct No. 108 of the Krasnoselsky district . Court district No. 111 of the Kurortny district Court district No. 112 of the Kurortny district Court district No. 113 of Norilsk Court district No. 113 of the Kurortny district Court district No. 114 of the Petrodvortsovy district Court district No. 118 of the Moskovsky district Court district No. 119 of the Moskovsky district Court district No. 120 of the Moskovsky district Court district No. 121 of the Volgograd region No. 125 of the Moskovsky District Court plot No. 126 of the Moskovsky District Court site No. 127 of the Moskovsky District Court site No. 128 of the Moskovsky District Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 134 of Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 134 of the Vykhino-Zhulebino district of Moscow Judicial precinct No. 135 of Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 136 of Nevsky district Precinct No. 14 of the Vsevolozhsky District of the Leningrad Region Judicial Precinct No. 140 of the Nevsky District Judicial Precinct No. 141 of the Nevsky District Judicial Precinct No. 142 of the Nevsky District Judicial Precinct No. 143 of the Nevsky District precinct No. 147 of the Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 148 of the Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 148 of the Strogino district Judicial precinct No. 149 of the Nevsky district Judicial precinct No. 149 of the Strogino district of Moscow Judicial precinct No. 15 Plyussky district of the Pskov region Court No. 151 of the Petrogradsky District Judicial precinct No. 152 of the Petrogradsky District Judicial precinct No. 153 of the Petrogradsky District Judicial precinct No. 154 of the Petrogradsky District Court district No. 16 of the Okulovsky judicial district of the Novgorod region Court district No. 160 of the Primorsky district Court district No. 161 of the Primorsky district 166 Primorsky district Court district No. 167 of the Primorsky district Court district No. 168 of the Primorsky district Court district No. 169 of the Primorsky district Court district No. 170 of the Primorsky district Court district No. 171 of the Primorsky district district Judicial precinct No. 175 of the Primorsky district Judicial precinct No. 176 of the Pushkinsky district Judicial precinct No. 177 of the Pushkinsky district Judicial precinct No. 178 of the Pushkinsky district Judicial precinct No. 179 of the Pushkinsky district District Court No. 182 of the Frunzensky District Court precinct No. 183 of the Frunzensky District Court precinct No. 184 of the Frunzensky District Court precinct No. 185 of the Frunzensky District Court precinct No. 186 of the Frunzensky District fucking precinct No. 19 of the Primorsky district of St. Petersburg Judicial precinct No. 190 of the Frunzensky district Judicial precinct No. 191 of the Frunzensky district Judicial precinct No. 192 of the Frunzensky district Judicial precinct No. 193 of the Frunzensky district Court district No. 195 of the Frunzensky district Court district No. 196 of the Mozhaysky district of Moscow Court district No. 196 of the Frunzensky district Court district No. 199 of the Kuntsevo district Court district No. 199 of the Tsentralny district Court district No. 20 of the Vologda region Court district No. 200 of the Kuntsevo district Court district No. 200 of the Tsentralny district precinct No. 202 of the Kuntsevo district of Moscow Judicial precinct No. 202 of the Tsentralny district Judicial precinct No. 203 of Moscow Judicial precinct No. 203 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 204 Moscow precinct No. 205 of the Krylatskoye district Judicial precinct No. 205 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 206 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 207 of the Dorogomilovo district Judicial precinct No. 207 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 208 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 209 of the Central district region Judicial precinct No. 210 of the Tsentralny district Judicial precinct No. 211 of the Central district Judicial precinct No. 219 of the Academic district of Moscow Court district No. 238 of the Biryulyovo-Zapadnoye district of Moscow Court district No. 240 of the Nagatinsky Zaton district of Moscow Court district No. 242 of the Nagatinsky Zaton district of Moscow Court district No. 248 of the Danilovsky district of Moscow No. 274, Kosino-Ukhtomsky district, Moscow Court district No. 275, Novokosino district, Moscow Court district No. 276, Novokosino district, Moscow Court district No. 277, Novokosino district 281 district of Veshnyaki, Moscow Court district No. 287, Novogireevo district, Moscow Court district No. 288, Novogireevo district Court district No. 288, Novogireevo district, Moscow Court district No. 29, Pskov Court district No. 294, Perovo district Judicial district precinct No. 346 of the Khoroshevsky district of Moscow Court precinct No. 346 of the Khoroshevsky district of Moscow Judicial precinct No. 349 of the Begovoy district Court district No. 380 of the Presnensky district Court district No. 4 of the Balashikha district of the Moscow region Court district No. 40 of the Starorussky judicial district of the Novgorod region Court district No. 421 of the Solntsevo district Court district No. 422 of the Tagansky district Court district No. 423 of the Tverskoy district of Moscow Court district No. 425 of the Khamovniki district of Moscow Shchapovskoye, Moscow Court district No. 438 of Moscow Settlements Pervomayskoye and Troitsk Court district No. 5 of the Leninsky district of Tambov Court district No. 64, Istra, Moscow region Tula Court district No. 7 of the Balashikha district of the Moscow region Court district No. 115 in the Talnakh district of Norilsk Court district No. 163 of the justice of the peace of the Odintsovo judicial district of the Moscow region Court district No. 18 of the Vsevolozhsky district of the Leningrad region Moscow Judicial precinct No. 198 of the Kuntsevo district of Moscow. Court plot No. 198 of the Kuntsevo district of Moscow. Court plot No. 2 of the Balashikha judicial district No. 372 of the Tagansky district of Moscow Court district No. 49 of the Cheryomushki district of Moscow Tagansky district court Tverskoy district court of Moscow Timiryazevsky district court of Moscow Tikhvin city court of the Leningrad region Tosnensky city court of the Leningrad region Arbitration court at the Autonomous non-profit organization " Independent Arbitration Chamber Arbitration Court at the Association of Real Estate Managers Troitsky District Court of Moscow Tushinsky District Court of Moscow Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Vyborgsky District of St. Petersburg Federal Security Service Feodosia City Court of the Republic of Crimea Frunzensky District Court of Vladimir Frunzensky District Court of St. Petersburg Khamovniki District Court of Moscow Khimki City Court of Moscow Region Khoroshevsky District Court of Moscow Central District Court of Voronezh Central District Court of Novosibirsk Central Court of Tolyatti, Samara Region Cheryomushkinsky District Court of Moscow Moscow Cherepovets City Court of the Vologda Region Chertanovsky District Court of Moscow Chekhov City Court of the Moscow Region Chudovsky District Court of the Novgorod Region Shatursky City Court of the Moscow Region Shchekinsky District Court of the Tula Region

Research Group "Safety and Reliability"

Construction expertise, Building inspection, Energy audit, Land management, Design

Professional examination of doors, their elements and/or the correct installation of the structure must be carried out by certified specialists with appropriate permits.

Results of expert checks

After the examination of the installation of the door or the product itself comes to an end, a written expert report is issued to the client. In conclusion, all identified defects are described in detail (photo materials are attached), the objective causes of malfunctions and, if necessary, an estimate for troubleshooting. The report also contains links to the requirements and regulated standards of technical specifications, SNiPs, GOSTs and other regulatory documents.

An expert report shows the actual state of purchased, but not yet installed or already installed door structures. The document has official force and can be used to resolve conflicts in court or out of court (between installers and the customer of services, developers and residents, manufacturers and buyers).

An important point is that, using the opinion of an independent expert, the injured party can count not only on a partial / full refund of the money given for the purchase and / or installation of the door. But also to compensate the work of the expert in full.

What can be checked?

In the course of research, experts analyze the verticality of the installation of the door frame and its condition, study the geometry of the dimensions of the structure. They evaluate the conformity of the characteristics of the product with GOSTs and TUs, check its mechanisms, structural elements and accessories, make sure of sufficient or insufficient reliability and performance.

Exact types and volumes necessary work largely depends on what kind of door in question. So, the examination of a metal door installed on stairwell, will be carried out according to one scheme, and the study of its interior analogue made of wood - according to another.

Requirements for the quality of external street, entrance and interior doors

The most severe requirements are imposed on door structures that “look” at the street. Since their tasks are the most numerous: thermal protection of premises from negative climatic factors, protection from uninvited guests, decoration of the exterior of the building.

If the client needs an examination of the front door installed at the entrance to the dwelling, the requirements for the quality of the product and its installation will be a little less numerous and strict. After all, the design is not exposed to precipitation and is operated at a comfortable temperature.

In the case of any entrance doors, no matter where they are directed - to the corridor or to the street, the study will be carried out:

Organoleptic method. The expert will study the working mechanisms, scratches and chips. Analyzing the damage and establishing its nature, he will understand whether they have arisen due to incorrect operation of the door or due to factory defects.
documentary method. Specialist define design features which could be the root cause of the problem. He will carefully work through the working documentation for the door, including technical papers. Ultimately, he will answer the question of who is to blame for the problem: the buyer, the installers, or the manufacturer.

The minimum requirements are for interior doors: aesthetics and appearance. By the way, it is in the case of interior products that most often you can find a manufacturing defect, hidden or obvious.

However, examination of interior doors is often carried out in order to prove incorrect installation. It also happens that instead of a laminated structure, the buyer receives a product with a laminated coating.

Cost of services

The exact cost of an expert's work depends on many conditions. For example, do you need an examination of the door frame or the entire door. Average research rates interior structures amount to 5-7 thousand rubles, for the study of input products they are slightly higher - 8-10 thousand rubles.

If you require an expert to appear in court, this service will have to be paid separately.

SOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Central District Court of Tula, consisting of:

presiding Naumova T.K.,

under the secretary Sycheva E.O.,

Having considered in open court a civil case No. 2-26/11 on the claim of Privezentseva FULL NAME16 to an individual entrepreneur Dolgovaya FULL NAME17 on termination of the work contract, recovery of damages, penalties and compensation for moral damage,

installed:

Privezentseva V.N. applied with statement of claim to the court to an individual entrepreneur Dolgovoi FULL NAME18 to terminate the contract, recovery of damages, forfeit and non-pecuniary damage, referring to the fact that DD.MM.YYYY between the plaintiff and SP Dolgovoi Oh.GN. signed contract No. for the manufacture and installation of six interior doors. The total price of the order is 115,660 rubles (clause 2.1.). In addition to the contract, she paid for extras, connections and platbands (a copy of the receipt for the incoming cash order No. dated DD.MM.YYYY is attached). Warranty period for doors - 12 months (clause 5.4. of the agreement). The work (service) is fully paid for by her, which is confirmed by cashier's checks and a receipt for the receipt cash order dated DD.MM.YYYY (copy attached). Separately, the receipt of IP Dolgova O.N. payment for the installation of doors was not issued, however, the defendant received money from her for the manufacture and installation of doors and the performance of this service by workers SP Dolgovoi Oh.GN. The defendant's work was done poorly, namely: - Entrance door in the apartment and the box on the door are made of different colors, the hinges are turned upside down relative to each other, the screws are not completely screwed in, the screws are not screwed in completely and protrude; - the door of the bathroom (toilet) and the box are different in color, there are gaps on the box, sealing rubber sticks out of the groove, in the lower part the veneer cracked and peeled off on both sides, the screws stick out of the box, the hinges are reversed relative to each other, when the hinges were unscrewed by the specialist IP Dolgova O.N., sent to eliminate defects, the box was damaged; - the bathroom door and the box to it are different in color, there are slit-like gaps in the upper part of the box, in the lower part the veneer cracked and peeled off on one side, on the other side there is a crumb-like cut, the screws are not completely screwed in, the door does not close, when the door is closed turns inside out door frame; - in the door of the hall, a decorative strip covering the guide is cut in the center with a crumb-like cut, all parts of the door assembly have a different color; - in the bedroom door, all parts of the door assembly have a different color. The doors to the hall have not been installed. The toilet has no door either.

The plaintiff sent a claim to the defendant by mail with a return receipt, which was served on DD.MM.YYYY (copies of the claim and notice are attached). In the claim, she demanded from IP Dolgova O.N. refund of the money paid in connection with poor-quality performance of work on the manufacture and installation of doors and the payment of a penalty. The claim has not been answered.

DD.MM.YYYY LLC “Tula Center for Independent Expertise “Expert Group”, according to the plaintiff, conducted an examination of the quality of the work performed by IP Dolgova O.N. Expert V.G. Baulin found that the doors were made with numerous shortcomings, and their installation was carried out in violation of the installation instructions and was done carelessly.

Asks the court:

terminate the consumer contract for the manufacture and installation of interior doors with IP Dolgova O.N. in connection with the refusal to perform the contract.

collect from IP Dolgova Oh.GN. 125,660 rubles - losses on the manufacture and installation of doors.

collect from IP Dolgova Oh.GN. expenses for the examination of doors in the amount of 19,000 rubles.

collect from IP Dolgova Oh.GN. forfeit (fine) for the delay in fulfilling the requirement for a refund for a poor-quality service of 125,660 rubles.

collect from IP Dolgova Oh.GN. losses associated with legal assistance in the amount of 20,000 rubles.

collect from IP Dolgova Oh.GN. caused moral damage in the amount of 100,000 rubles.

At the hearing, VN Privezentseva supported her claims in full and requested that they be satisfied.

From the explanations given by her, it follows that, under the terms of the contract concluded with the defendant, the installation of the doors acquired by her is carried out by the defendant. The cost of this service is indicated in the order form without specifying this type of work. In total, she paid 9,600 rubles for the installation of 6 doors.

Delivery of goods was carried out free of charge. She did not sign the act of acceptance and transfer of the goods, since she was at work during the transfer of the goods. The products ordered by her were handed over to her son without drawing up any document.

Door delivery date is DD.MM.YYYY, fittings were delivered DD.MM.YYYY.

When examining the goods, she discovered a difference in the color of the doors - the trims differ in color from the door leaf.

After some time, three men came to her place of residence and began to install the doors she had purchased. One of them introduced himself as O.N. Dolgova’s husband; she does not know the names of the other two men. As a result of their actions, 4 out of 6 doors were installed, the men refused to install the remaining doors and did not come to her in the future.

In her opinion, the installation of the doors was performed poorly.

In June 2010, she turned to the defendant with an application for the return of the amount paid, which was refused.

DD.MM.YYYY she filed a claim with the defendant in connection with the improper performance of the terms of the contract. Then, on her own initiative, she turned to the Tula Center for Independent Expertise in order to determine the quality of the doors supplied and the quality of their installation. As a result of the conclusion received, it was found that the supplied doors do not meet the requirements of GOST, their installation was carried out in violation of the installation instructions.

At the hearing the representative of the plaintiff on warrant lawyer Korchevsky The.C. supported the claims of the plaintiff, asked them to satisfy.

At the hearing, the defendant Dolgova Oh. N. did not recognize the claims, she asked to refuse to satisfy the stated requirements.

It follows from her objections that she entrepreneurial activity in the office building at:<адрес>B office 17, where in August 2009, gr. Privezentseva FULL NAME19. She decided to purchase interior doors for their subsequent delivery in the apartment at the place of permanent residence in<адрес>. In this regard, they concluded Agreement no.

The agreement contains conditions for the transfer of Privezentseva V.N. building products according to the description and dimensions provided by it. According to the content of the Agreement, she assumed obligations to transfer interior doors to the plaintiff according to her chosen samples in the required quantity and configuration. Clause 1 of this Agreement and the Order form contain a complete list of the obligations assumed by it. Based on their analysis, it follows that she did not assume the obligation to install these doors. This type of service requires mandatory approval in writing, because in this case it is responsible for the quality of the installation, which is expressly provided for in clause 4.5 of the Agreement. She believes that the agreement of the parties to install the doors is mandatory, while an additional fee is paid for this, and the terms are stipulated. The plaintiff did not order doors in full factory readiness, assembled in blocks consisting of door panels hung on hinges and boxes. She ordered building products, agreed on the complete set, and by virtue of the requirements of the law, the consumer can be supplied with one door leaf and frame at his request.

After the Contract No. for the manufacture of doors was concluded, the plaintiff wished to conclude a new agreement for the purchase of extensions, connecting strips and platbands, which are not included in the cost of the doors and are ordered by the consumer additionally. At the same time, she personally chose the necessary equipment. This is a separate contract. purchase and sale and has nothing to do with the original Treaty. At the same time, the buyer chooses the color and quantity of fittings. DD.MM.YYYY, a few months after the signing of the main Agreement, Privezentseva V.N. entered into another sale and purchase agreement, according to which the imported products were delivered to her. The contract was not concluded in writing, it was enough to pay the buyer, and she provided the appropriate service. These agreements are not interconnected, otherwise they would have drawn them up as an additional agreement to Agreement No. It is clause 7 of Agreement No. that says that if the customer decides to change the design, size and decor, then this is drawn up by the parties in the appropriate form. color scheme at the same time, the plaintiff chose herself, to her taste, as a result of which the inconsistency of some details in shades is not her fault. She does not know who installed the doors in the apartment and how. He believes that she turned to outsiders to install the doors, however, being dissatisfied with their work, she sued her. Among other things, she explained that the color variation indicated by the plaintiff as one of the reasons for terminating the Sale and Purchase Agreement is not a defect in this case, because the veneer is of natural origin and color variation is allowed, it is not a factory defect, which the manufacturer always warns about, in this case PC "Volkhovets". The information stand in the trading floor has information about this, which is available for reading to all consumers. He believes that poor-quality installation led to the presence of all kinds of defects in installed doors However, due to the fact that this service was not provided by her, she is not responsible for this. In this regard, she sent a telegram to the plaintiff, asking for proof of the installation, but received no answer. Currently, due to poor-quality installation, the appearance of the doors is damaged, as a result of which it is not possible to take them back, they do not have a presentation. If Privezentseva V.N. within 14 days, established by law, presented her with requirements for different shades, she would immediately satisfy them, because the doors had not yet been installed and damaged. With the conclusion of the expert provided by the plaintiff, she familiarized with him does not agree on the above grounds. I do not agree with the plaintiff's claims, because, by virtue of the requirements of the law, the plaintiff is obliged to prove the claims to which he refers, however, the court has not been provided with evidence that she has assumed the obligation to install and pay for the installation. It was a poor-quality installation that caused the formation of mechanical damage, but she is not responsible for this. Due to the fact that the plaintiff, at the conclusion of the contract No. dated DD.MM.YYYY, was not informed that she would be charged transportation costs in the amount of 9,600 rubles for delivery, according to the order form to the contract, this amount in the amount of 9,600 rubles I agree to return Privezentseva V.N.

At the hearing, the representative of the defendant Dolgova O.N., according to the warrant, the lawyer Shirokikh A.V. did not recognize the claims, he asked to refuse to satisfy them.

Having listened to the persons participating in the case, witnesses, an expert, having examined the case materials, the court finds the claims of Privezentseva V.N. to be partially satisfied on the following grounds:

The court comes to the following conclusions.

When concluding agreement 237/09 dated DD.MM.YYYY, the parties stipulated that the quality of the products transferred from the contractor to the customer must comply with the requirements of the standards established by law (GOST).

According to the order form to this agreement, the subject of the agreement are interior doors in the amount of 6 pieces.

The act of the expert opinion dated DD.MM.YYYY established that in violation of clauses 3, 1 of GOST 475-478 “Wooden doors. Are common specifications” and GOST 24404-80 “Products made of wood and wood materials. Paint and varnish coatings, the contractor violated the completeness of the delivery of door blocks, as a result of which there is an over-permissible variation in shades of the prefabricated parts of the door leaf and the frame.

This lack of products is significant, giving the consumer the right in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 29 of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" to refuse to execute the contract and demand full compensation for damages, since it cannot be eliminated without a disproportionate amount of time.

The obligation of the seller to transfer to the consumer the goods, the quality of which corresponds to the contract, is provided for by Art. 4 of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights".

In the event of the sale of goods of inadequate quality, the right to choose the type of requirement, which, in accordance with Art. 503 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 1 of Art. 18 of the Law "On the Protection of Consumer Rights" can be brought against the seller upon delivery of goods of inadequate quality, if its shortcomings were not specified by the seller, belongs to the buyer.

In this case, the consumer has the right to withdraw from the contract and demand the return of the amount of money paid for the goods.

According to the terms of contract 237/09 dated DD.MM.YYYY, the contractor undertook to transfer construction products to the customer according to the description, dimensions provided by the customer and design and estimate documentation.

The contractor carries out the installation, if it is stipulated in the contract.

In this case, the text of the contract does not contain the obligation of the contractor to install the ordered products.

However, in the cost of the order to this contract, the contractor included the amount of 9,600 rubles, divided into four positions, the purpose of which was not specified in the order form.

This amount was paid by the plaintiff as the cost of door installation services.

Interrogated at the court session as witnesses - N. N. Krestinina, E. S. Privezentsev testified that, according to the explanations of the manager of IP Dolgova, when concluding the contract, the cost of installing doors was included in the total amount of the order.

According to the plaintiff and witness Privezentsev E.S., the installation of the four doors was carried out by the husband of the defendant Dolgov, Dolgov A.B., and two unfamiliar men who arrived with him.

Dolgov A.B., interrogated at the court session as a witness, confirmed that in January 2010 he brought the plaintiff extras, platbands and connections, accepted money from her in the amount of 10,000 rubles and wrote out a receipt for the cash receipt order, did not install doors .

Defendant Dolgova at the hearing insisted that no agreement had been reached with the plaintiff on the installation of doors, the amount of 9,600 rubles included in the cost of the order, the purpose of which was not specified in the order form, reflected the cost of services for the delivery of products to the consumer. Subsequently, the defendant expressed a desire to return this amount to the plaintiff due to the groundlessness of its inclusion in the cost of the order.

When resolving this dispute court proceeds from the fact that, due to the lack of consumer special knowledge about the characteristics of the goods, the defendant as a contractor under the contract by virtue of Art. 12 of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" was obliged to provide the plaintiff in a timely manner with the necessary and reliable information about the services and goods provided, providing an opportunity for a competent choice. This information in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 8 of the Law should be brought to the attention of the consumer in a clear and accessible form when concluding a contract for the provision of services.

The absence both in the order form to the contract and in the text of the contract itself of the necessary information on the installation of doors if there are sums of money in the order form, the purpose of which is not indicated, is regarded by the court as a violation by the defendant of the requirements of Art. 12 of the Law and failure to provide the necessary information under the concluded contract with the onset of the consequences listed in paragraph 2 of Art. 12 of the Law.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 12 of the Law of the Russian Federation of DD.MM.YYYY N 2300-1 (as amended by DD.MM.YYYY) "On the protection of consumer rights, the seller (executor) who has not provided the buyer with complete and reliable information about the product (work, service) is liable , provided for in paragraphs 1-4 of Article 18 or paragraph 1 of Article 29 of this Law, for defects in goods (work, services) that arose after its transfer to the consumer due to the lack of such information.

As follows from Art. 18, Law of the Russian Federation of DD.MM.YYYY N 2300-1 (as amended by DD.MM.YYYY) "On the Protection of Consumer Rights", the consumer, in the event of defects in the product, if they were not specified by the seller, at his choice has the right:

demand a replacement for a product of the same brand (the same model and (or) article);

demand a replacement for the same product of a different brand (model, article) with a corresponding recalculation of the purchase price;

demand a commensurate reduction in the purchase price;

demand immediate gratuitous elimination of product defects or reimbursement of expenses for their correction by the consumer or a third party;

refuse to fulfill the contract of sale and demand the return of the amount paid for the goods. At the request of the seller and at his expense, the consumer must return the goods with defects.

At the same time, the consumer has the right to demand also full compensation for losses caused to him as a result of the sale of goods of inadequate quality. Losses are reimbursed within the time limits established by this Law to meet the relevant requirements of the consumer.

The requirements specified in paragraph 1 of this article are presented by the consumer to the seller or an authorized organization or an authorized individual entrepreneur.

Instead of presenting these requirements, the consumer has the right to return the goods of inadequate quality to the manufacturer or importer and demand the return of the amount paid for it. (parts 1, 2, 3 of article 18 of the Law).

the court decided:

Claims Privezentseva FULL NAME20 satisfy partially.

Terminate the household contract No. from DD.MM.YYYY, concluded between Privezentseva FULL NAME21 and IP Dolgovaya FULL NAME22.

To recover from IP Dolgovaya FULL NAME23 in favor of Privezentseva FULL NAME24 the amount paid under the contract in the amount of 115,660 rubles, as well as losses in the amount of 10,000 rubles, a penalty for the delay in fulfilling the requirement for a voluntary return of money in the amount of 20,000 rubles, compensation for non-pecuniary damage - 20,000 rubles , the costs of paying for the examination in the amount of 19,000 rubles, the costs of paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 15,000 rubles.

Collect from IP Dolgovaya FULL NAME25 a fine to the state revenue for non-compliance with the voluntary satisfaction of consumer requirements in the amount of 62,830 rubles.

Oblige Privezentsevu FULL NAME26 to return IP Dolgovoi FULL NAME27 interior doors in the amount of 6 pieces in the compensation received.

The decision may be appealed to the Judicial Board on civil affairs Tula Regional Court by filing a cassation appeal through the Central District Court of Tula within 10 days from the date of the final decision.