Valencia civil court denies €120 refund for unfinished wardrobe assembly

A civil court in Valencia denied Clara Benavent's claim for a €120 refund for wardrobe assembly that Rubén Salcedo did not complete. Clara had paid €300 for delivery and assembly but sought back only the assembly portion.

The court said the evidence did not establish who was responsible for the unfinished work or provide a basis for calculating another refund. It ordered neither party to pay the other.

The accepted WhatsApp quote and payment acknowledgment established the separate prices: €180 for delivery and €120 for assembly. They also required a clear working area, but did not say what would happen if the room was not ready or set a return-visit fee.

A desk was in the work area when Rubén arrived. Clara said she offered to move it; Rubén said he did not hear that offer. The court could not determine what was said or whether the clear-area condition had been met or excused.

Because Clara was seeking repayment, she had to prove the facts supporting it. The court said the unfinished assembly alone did not establish that Rubén breached the agreement, and the record did not establish a separate amount of loss or a basis for a proportionate refund.

The next-day messages showed that Clara asked Rubén to finish after the desk had been moved and that he proposed returning for €45. The court said that charge was not an agreed term, but its absence from the original deal did not by itself establish entitlement to the €120 refund. Clara had not paid the proposed charge.

Clara said she offered to remove the desk during the first visit, but Rubén left without hearing or accepting the offer. She relied on the later messages and asked for the assembly payment back, not the delivery charge.

Rubén argued that the desk was still in the work area when he arrived, contrary to the agreed condition, and asked the court to deny or reduce the refund. He accepted that the agreement did not specify a return fee and did not claim that the desk could not have been moved.

Rubén delivered the wardrobe boxes to Clara's Valencia home but left without assembling them. The following day, Clara messaged that the desk was out and asked him to finish; she declined his offer to return on Thursday for an additional €45.

The court said the later exchange did not establish what happened during the first visit. Its decision did not find that Clara acted unreasonably or that Rubén was entitled to abandon the work; it reflected the limits of the evidence presented.