£110 20months old end of life item RMAed for £20+VAT refund???

[magicdust]

You are right Oldjim, neither Scan nor Palit mentions any T&C on their website or printed invoice. I think this is something to be looked upon. Cause whatever method Scan or Palit used to calculate the value of refund is not made known to the user, which is not a right thing to do.

And yes, we are yet to hear from Scan reps here. Maybe they could at least let us know how they calculate the refund value.

Btw, I'm not sure if it's just Palit's card or it's a fundamental problem with 7900GS reference board. The card has a very short life span. This card I RMAed is acutally a replacement card for my earlier 7900GS. Maybe it's just pure bad luck, having 2 cards died in less than 12 months time each.

[Blitzen]

Why do you seem to think that its Scan that 'calculate' your refund.

Your warranty wuth Scan is for 1 year.
After that year, its with the manufacturer.

During year 2, if there is a fault ALL Scan are REQUIRED to do is return the card to the manufacturer on your behalf.
They have done this right???

So.......the card was assessed by Palit....not Scan, not a lawyer, just the MANUFACTURER

Palit decided that your card is worth £20+vat......NOT Scan.

If you take issue with this then its not Scan you need to chase....its the manufacturer.

Although i agree that maybe Palit (not Scan) shouldve replaced it with a simialr card, they didnt and its too bad.
The card, and this is where i agree with Palit, is very old news now and isnt worth more than £20 odd anyway.

[Oldjim]

Where does it say that the warranty is with Palit after the first year when Palit state that all warranties are through the supplier. In any case Scan have apparently used the same argument with a card that failed after 9 months - see link in my earlier post.
The fundamental problem here is that nowhere on the Scan site or the Palit site or in the documentation received with the card is there any details of the terms and conditions related to the warranty. As such this type of argument will keep coming up.
Now if Scan stated that where such a product fails within the warranty period and that product was no longer available they would only offer a proportion of the original purchase price reduced by the ratio of the time remaining of the warranty period to the original warranty period we would know where we stood.
The fundamental assumption behind all this seems to be that the expected life is the same as the guaranteed life - this is totally incorrect

[Agent]

Your warranty wuth Scan is for 1 year.
After that year, its with the manufacturer.

During year 2, if there is a fault ALL Scan are REQUIRED to do is return the card to the manufacturer on your behalf.

Woooooahhh there. Thats well off the mark.

Scan can be liable under the Sales of Goods act for up to 6 years.
They key points being:

*It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

*For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

The Sales of Goods act is very clear on where liability lies if a product is/was not fit for purpose.

Now its not for me to say if this RMA would come under not being "fit for purpose", but claiming that any retailer can wash their hands of a product after a year is wrong I'm afraid mate

http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fac...page38311.html

[Blitzen]

If that is the case then Agent, and i am not disputing whether it is or not then there are only a few things that can be at fault:

1. Scan are neglecting their duty to the customer.
2. Scan have incorrect information on their website.
3. Who's opinion is decided upon when the 'not fit for purpose' scenarion arises.

It looks like Pailt have decided that the card was fit for purpose. It is almost 2 years old dont forget. They cant decipher what condition the card is in (it may be totally clogged up with dust).

Maybe they are just flouting the law. Who knows....none of us.

Either way, i doubt there is any recourse as the condition the card was when scan received it as RMA is only know by Scan and the customer. The fact that a partial refund was offered suggests the card was in a clean, looked-after state.

Unfortunately though, ALL etailers give depreciative refunds. I know the 'one that should not be mentioned' does.
So do Ebuyer.

It would be interesting to see this one in court. The precedence, when set, would have major repercussions.

What i do find interesting and pretty poor, is that Scan have not responded at all.

[Oldjim]

Unfortunately though, ALL etailers give depreciative refunds.
It would be interesting to see this one in court. The precedence, when set, would have major repercussions.

I agree 100% - I suspect that it wouldn't stand up.
One thing which this does raise is the inherent extra risk of purchasing an item which is approaching end of life or even when the etailer no longer stocks it. My latest Gigabyte motherboard would be a case in point GA-P35-DS4 which Scan no longer stock and has been replaced with the GA-EP35_DS4 which is a higher spec board.

[moogle]

So do Ebuyer.

Weird,

am I the only one who recieved two full refunds so far?

[Oldjim]

did a quick Google on - ebuyer partial refund - and this was the first result http://forums.ebuyer.com/showthread.php?t=451

[Stringent]

In an ideal world the owner should either get back what he paid for the card, or an equivalent card at the current price he paid for. Now if the T&C are with Scan they would have to do the refund at a loss to them (and then hopefully claim it back of the manufacturer) or the manufacturer deals directly with it. The value of the current card is irrelevant, a warranty is good for however long is stated. It means you get repairs done or if a repair can't be done a replacement card, albeit refurb or new one at the cost of the original.

Thats good customer service.

I do remember sending back an 80GB Maxtor to Maxtor once (3rd year of 3yr warranty) because it was dying, got a 160GB in replacement because the 80GB wasn't made anymore. Otherwise what is the point of a warranty when you get offered £20 for an item you can't replace at that amount?

I just looked up the John Lewis (for example) extended warranty T&C

http://www.johnlewis.com/jl_assets/p...ranties_07.pdf

Says they will try to repair, or if its non repairable or uneconomical or the model is no longer unavailable, they may provide an alternative of similar spec and quality.

However despite the may clause, in the cases I know where people have claimed on the JL warranty they have either had the newer model equivalent or a refund on what they purchased originally.

[Oldjim]

Taken from Scan Terms and Conditions

The terms of any manufacturer’s guarantee and after sales service will be included within the documents accompanying the goods.

In the case of Palit this clearly isn't happening.

[magicdust]

Well, as far as I was told when I called Scan, they did not mention anything about Palit's side. So I would assume that the partial refund was given by Scan themselves, and not Palit.

In most cases, I guess big reputable companies like eBuyer and John Lewis do pay out full refund and absorb the loss by themselves, even if they don't get back the refund from the manufacturers in order to safeguard their reputation. It all depends on how willing the company is to protect its customers.

In this case, Scan could have given me a 8600GT as a replacement which probably cost them 20-25quid more (since their cost price will be lower than the retail price) than what they are refunding now. They could easily make up the loss on my next system upgrade purchase, keep a happy customer and safeguard their used to be excellent customer service. But they chose not to, I just don't know what they are thinking here...

[Blitzen]

Well, as far as I was told when I called Scan, they did not mention anything about Palit's side. So I would assume that the partial refund was given by Scan themselves, and not Palit.

It would be enormously unlikely that the refund is from Scan.
Usually the etailer contacts the manufacturer and then then card is often returned for repair/replacement.
Once the manufacturer has it, they then decided if its viable for them to repair. If its not, an no replacement is available (or in your case, they simply cant be bothered ), they send a refund to the etailer to pass onto the customer. (In you case £20+vat)

The fact remains though.....whatever anyone says to you, your contract is with Scan and not Palit. Although i doubt Scan can do alot about it, the ball is in their court.

I would say, after reading what you have sent in, that it shouldve really been swapped for a 8500 or 8600 series card as thats the nearest equivalent available now.
I REALLY WOULD push for this.

[Chris P]

magicdust

I will bring this thread to the attention of the The Returns Manager, if he is not already looking into this. We will post in reply on Monday, until then the thread is locked.

Regards