Printable View
What are peoples understandings of the sale of goods act (or even just good customer care) in the following scenario?
A person (me) buys an electrical item online.
It starts exhibiting a fault within 2 weeks.
The retailer won't offer a replacement just a repair but that will take weeks to turn round.
Can I have peoples opinions on this please?
As long as the repair occurs within 28 days, I believe that'll meet their legal requirements.
http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fac...page38311.html
Nearly all retailers take 30 days to be the 'reasonable period' within which you'd be entitled to a full refund or a replacement. If they don't sort one out I would get in touch with Trading Standards.
Name and shame.
Have you tried contacting the manufacturer? Sometimes it might be quicker than just going back to the retailer, even though they should fix it.
Thanks for the comments so far.
My own understanding was that I was entitled to repair, refund or replacement within a reasonable time - most decent companies work to 28 or 30 days for that and I believe it is my option as to which of these solutions I take.
Nope! it is *not* your choice what you get, it's theirs.Quote:
Originally Posted by blueball
See point 7 in this link: http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fac...page38311.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Lucio
Completely wrong. Provided you get back to them in a reasonable time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucio
If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit
You can REQUEST what you want, whether or not you get it is an entirely different matter, it IS the retailers choice in the matter
What did you buy, out of interest - many of these will depend on the item. Some will request you go via the manufacturer for this sort of thing.
However, if it's a fault with the product that wasn't caused via negligence, the vast majority of stores will just take it back and replace it. They shouldn't lose money as they just send them back to their warehouse/supplier as faulty.
TBH they're offering a repair. Take the hit and let them do it. Or go directly to the manufacturer for replacement - if it comes with a warranty/guarantee they should honour it.
You know, that point 7 is an entirely useless point out of context, it says you can alternatively request a repair or replacement if you're a consumer. Alternative to what?? I believe it's alternative to being offered a partial refund to prevent businesses screwing people over with useless refunds for non-working products!Quote:
Originally Posted by blueball
Quite frankly if you're arguing with us so much, you're either a) getting screwed over or b) are in the wrong and the etailer is simply one with narrow profit margins who can't afford to do what the big stores do and screw the manufacturers like Tesco or Costco do...
Get some evidence of GTFO. I am fed up of rubbish like this being dished out as advice.Quote:
Originally Posted by finlay666
You might think that rubbish is true, but the court cases I have helped friends win would suggest otherwise. When's the last time you took a retailer/salesman to court or helped slomeone do that?
Perhaps check out the trading standards website before spouting this drivel.
Err I haven't, I have however been on the other end many timesQuote:
Originally Posted by badass
And I did look at the website.
From:
http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/c...V0043-1011.txt
I think it is pretty clear that the seller does NOT have to give you a refund, it is dependent on the situation, some retailers I have worked for have operated a 7 day refund policy, other than that it is repair or replacement, perfectly within the law.Quote:
What are you entitled to ask for?
If the goods are faulty at the time of sale, you are legally entitled to request one of the following remedies:
1) A full refund.
This remedy is available when the goods have not been ‘accepted’. Under the Sale of Goods Act, acceptance can take place in three ways:
By telling the retailer that you have accepted them.
By acting in a way with the goods which is inconsistent with the seller’s ownership. E.g. if you have altered the goods in any way or customised them then you would be deemed to have accepted them.
By keeping them for longer than a reasonable time without telling the seller that you have rejected them. There is no time specified in the Act and it may vary according to the type of goods. Ultimately, it may be for the judge to decide whether an unreasonable time has passed and whether goods have been accepted. For this reason you must contact the supplier, preferably in writing, as soon as the fault appears. To delay may mean you lose a right to a refund
If acceptance has taken place, then only the following remedies are available:
2) Compensation (damages)
The amount of compensation may be based on the cost of repair, or if that is not possible, compensation may be based on the purchase price with an allowance for usage.
3) Repair or replacement
The trader can refuse to agree to either of these remedies if it is disproportionate in comparison to the other remedies. For example, if you ask a trader to replace a washing machine then he would be entitled to turn down your request and offer a repair instead.
However, the repair or replacement must be carried out within a reasonable time and without causing significant inconvenience to the consumer. If this does not happen or the repair or replacement is not possible, then the consumer can rescind the contract (claim a refund) or request a reduction in purchase price.
Please note: The remedies of repair/replacement and the subsequent rescission or reduction in purchase price are not applicable to Hire Purchase contracts and other laws apply. Please contact your local Trading Standards Service for further advice
4) Rescission or reduction in price
These financial remedies can only be achieved by a failure of the repair / replacement option once acceptance has taken place. If the trader agrees to rescission, the amount paid may be reduced to take account of usage.
Once you have chosen a remedy and the trader has agreed, you must give the trader a reasonable time to effect the chosen remedy before switching to another one. Ultimately, if a remedy cannot be agreed upon, then the courts have the power to choose any of the remedies.
Saracen in 3....2....1....
Seriously, he's the man on this kind of thing. I could comment, but I'll likely be wrong.
I'm fed up of people blowing their own trumpets.Quote:
Originally Posted by badass
If you've helped friends win cases, then I would assume that you're not a lawyer, else you would have "won the cases on behalf of your clients". Maybe if you were a lawyer, you could quote the law, as it stands, which I see you fail to do.
I notice you provide no evidence to counter Finlay's arguments, so maybe think twice about "spouting off" yourself?
I think having seen it from both sides helps my perspective, but I wasn't going to be quite as brazen in my post but couldn't word it eloquently enough for my liking :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B
I think "evidence or GTFO" is a bit or a strong thing to say with no evidence too :lol:
I appreciate the help of those who are trying to help. Can those who wish to have a private argument please take it elsewhere? Thank you.
Back on topic:
- It was an Asus EEE laptop
- It worked properly for less than 2 weeks then would lock up when you plugged the power supply in.
- I contacted Asus who said it needed to be RMAd but I cant afford downtime as I need to use it regularly.
- I contacted etailer and offered to buy a new one up front and could i have a refund on original once they received it (to avoid any downtime); they refused.
- They kept telling me to send it to asus but asus wouldn't even offer an estimate as to how long the turnround would be; eventually (but not helpfully) etailer said I could return it to them and they would send it to asus but it would be a 6 to 8 week turnround
All I want is a fully working laptop so I dont have to decide whether I need to plug-in the power supply before I boot it up :(
Who was the etailer in this case ??
Ok there is a lot wrong with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by blueball
6-8 weeks for a 2 week old item to be repaired is IMO unreasonable
You should not be dealing with the manufacturer, the retailer is the first port of call for a year after your purchase
Who was the retailer? They should have a bit on their website about their returns and refund policy, can you at least say who it is so we can help you a bit more
OK. The etailer was Scan.
I was probably as shocked as you are as I have always found them really good with returns in the past.
http://www.scan.co.uk/Terms.aspx
We recognise that goods supplied by us to you may not meet your expectations. In our experience there are many reasons why that may happen. Examples of those reasons include a defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, incompatibility with existing components within your system, poor installation or simply slower performance than you require.
We are not able to establish why the goods have failed to meet your expectations without an opportunity of inspecting and testing the goods.
In any case where the goods fail to meet your expectations we invite you to return them to us with an explanation of the problem.
In any case where we agree that the problem has arisen because of a defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you:
we will refund the cost of the goods to you if returned within 28 days of the date of delivery; in any other case we will replace the goods or provide you with a credit for the cost of the goods.
best point that out to them, I find you get further with companies if you are polite and understanding, however be firm about it and that is what they aspire to so should follow it.
EDIT: I also suggest you sign up and ask on http://www.eeeuser.com/ as there may be others that have had the same problem and have a solution for it.
You will always see Scan getting a good rep here.Quote:
Originally Posted by blueball
This shows that no etailer is as squeaky as they make out though.
IF....the item was indeed less than 2 weeks old.....
AND.......the fault is completely apparent
I would claim via the credit card used to pay for this item.
That is poor customer service from then and is totally unacceptable.
As i said, if all you have said is true, the item was blatantly faulty upon receipt and im sure would give rise to a right of refund.
Well done for not understanding the part you just quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by finlay666
Just before the bit in massive letters that you quoted
The customer has to accept the goods.Quote:
If acceptance has taken place, then only the following remedies are available:
I guess I shall hand back the £3000 I got from a car dealer that was a full refund a few years ago.
There is nothing you can say or quote or anything else to change the fact that I won a court case when I was offered a repair that I refused. I demended a full refund.
You have to accept the goods before the retailer can force you to do anything. If you have not accepted the goods they can't force you to do anything.
Please, stop giving advice on that which you do not understand. :rolleyes:
In fact, since you seem to claim to have been on the other end several times you can point out where you won court cases where a customer rejected the goods within a reasoanble time and demanded a refund, yet lost to you?
Its funny, the car dealer seemed to believe the was just like you said it.
When did you notify Scan there was a fault? Was it around 2 weeks after purchase? If so you are in a very strong position to go for the full refund. As Blitzen says if you need a laptop sharpish, make completely sure that the Laptop is faulty, make sure you have evidence of you contacting them 2 weeks after purchase, buy another laptop and if Scan get funny after finding it faulty, go the Credit card company route.Quote:
Originally Posted by blueball
That said, are you sure you so desperately need it? If you've only had it 2 weeks are you really that relaint on it? Sometimes, even if you are right legally, it's not worth the hassle TBH. It took me 6 months to 1 year to get my refund (can't remember the exact dates). Another friends's case took over 8 months to sort.
It was approx 2 weeks after delivery. I bought it on 30 Aug this year and received it on 3 Sep. As it is now 21 Sep you can see I haven't had it long.Quote:
Originally Posted by badass
My point is, and I kept making this to them, I am not trying to get a refund, I am trying to get it swapped and I even went as far as offering to buy another one from them and sending the original one back after getting the new one setup the way I needed it. I felt that was pretty reasonable as an approach.
I think I will try the bleeding heart approach to Asus to see how quicjkly they can sort me out, surely it will be faster than the 6 to 8 weeks quoted bby Scan.
I did understand it actually, and given that there is the 7 day DOA period for acceptance of goods my point standsQuote:
Originally Posted by badass
Quote:
Originally Posted by badass
As stated before, use of the goods on many occasions (as I would deem being reliant on it as said) comes under acceptance of the goodsQuote:
Originally Posted by badass
I have been on the other side as my jobs over the past 4 years have involved plenty of customer services, in such time I have not been in receipt of one complaint from a customer with regards to an issue that I had dealt with from start to finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by badass
Badass:(funny how you said that to me, and I was able to prove it, yet you STILL haven't got any proof above your own "I'm so great I did x, y and z" circumstantial 'evidence' (If it can be called that, I would call it boasting))Quote:
Originally Posted by badass
Also funny you didn't state the circumstances under which cases you were such a brilliant solicitor and won the cases for your friends, or the car dealer for that matter.
Try making a post in the scan forum, or PM'ing one of the scan guys on here... I had a fault recently with an Asus sound card, which ocurred about 2-3 weeks after purchase. They offered me a full refund with no quibbles, very simple and the perfect scan service as i've come to expect. I can't see why they would not do the same for you - take the refund and then buy another one? If you have a credit card with some space on it you can order the new one as soon as they confirm your refund, so you'll have minimal downtime.Quote:
Originally Posted by blueball
More like 999 ...... 998 .. .. .---. .. 3 .... 2..... 1Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
But here goes anyway.
Firstly, for there to be any rights to reject goods, get them repaired or replaced, etc, they have to fail to conform to contract at the time of sale. So, if a device has died after two weeks, the first question will be why it died. If it's because you ran your laptop over with your tractor, or dunked it in the bath because you were browsing the web in the bath (etc), then, obviously, forget it. By the same token, you can't reject goods because you've changed your mind, or decided you don't like the colour .... unless, potentially, the goods don't conform to samples or descriptions.
So, assuming that it's a genuine fault with the product, the ext point is that for the first 6 months, it will be assumed that the fault existed at the time of delivery, unless the seller can prove otherwise. After that, the buyer has to prove it did, or the following rights vanish.
Next, "acceptance" is a critical point. The Sale of Goods Act gives vary levels of cover for whether goods are accepted" or not, depending on circumstances, such as whether it's a consumer sale or not, whether goods are sold by sample, and whether the consumer either had a reasonable chance to inspect goods or not. Essentially, if goods don't conform to contract, and prior to acceptance, the buyer can just reject them and cancel the contract.
But when are goods accepted? It depends, and it's not entirely straight-forward, but simplistically put :-
- if you "intimate" to the seller that you accept them
- if you do anything nor consistent with not having accepted them (such as modifying them)
- if a "reasonable" the goes past without communicating to the seller that you don't accept them.
That last one is the one that causes so many arguments. There is NO definition of how long "reasonable time" is. That some shops apply 28 (or 30) days is largely, if not entirely irrelevant. It is a COURT that decides what's reasonable, and it does it with regard to a range of factors, not least, whether the buyer has had a reasonable chance to check if goods comply to contract of not, but also with regard to the nature of the goods, and so on.
I've used the example before, but it makes the point. Just because 28 days is common, don't try taking a banana back to Tescos because it didn't last 28 days.
Is a couple of weeks with "reasonable time" to find out a laptop doesn't conform to contract? I don't know. It could be argued both ways. But I'd say it's borderline at best.
So, assuming the goods have been accepted, then what?
Well, we're back to that burden of proof of 6 months, and that IF goods didn't conform to contract at the time of sale, you have remedies for up to 6 years (England and Wales, but a bit different in Scotland). Assuming the seller can't prove that the goods did comply (i.e. can prove you dunked them in the bath, or whatever), then my understanding is that according to the SoGA 1979 s48(A) the consumer can choose between :-
1) repair
2) replacement
and it's the consumer's choice provided that doing so is
3) possible, and
4) not disproportionately expensive.
These restrictions are in SoGA s48(B).
So, the buyer can insist on replacement, provided it's possible and disproportionately expensive (compared to other remedies) or repair, subject to the same provisos. And note, subject to those caveats, it's the buyer's choice.
If, for example, the buyer wants a replacement and the seller insists on repair, the seller may have to justify to a court that replacement is either impossible or disproportionately expensive, or risk losing the case. The buyer chooses.
However, there's another stage.
If neither 3) nor 4) are options, or fail the 'disproportionate' test, then and only then does the buyer have a right to either choose :-
5) a reduction in price, or
6) to rescind the contract.
This is SoGA s48(C), and it requires 48(A) to be in effect, but ONLY applies if 48(B) allows. So if repair or replacement are options and don't fail 3) and 4) above, then rescission or price reductions aren't options the consumer can insist on.
However, there's yet another wrinkle.
If it's too late to reject goods before acceptance, and you're therefore left with you 48(B) right to repair or replacement, the seller must do whichever you choose (subject to 3) and 4) ) :-
7) within a reasonable time, and
8) with causing significant inconvenience to the buyer.
So, you can end up with the right to a price reduction or to a refund (which may well be partial) if :-
A) it was impossible or disproportionately costly to the seller to effect either replacement or repair
OR
B) they complied with the buyer's choice or repair or replacement, but could not do in a reasonable time or without either causing "significant inconvenience" to the buyer.
Of course, we're back to what "reasonable time" means, but now we've got what level of inconvenience is "significant" as well.
In both cases, it's what a court decides it is in relation to the details of the individual case and the nature of the goods. For instance, if the goods are a wedding dress that was ordered 6 months before the wedding, and when it's delivered, it promptly disintegrates or has huge and noticeable stains on it, is it "reasonable" for the replacement to take 2 months to produce? Well, it it's still delivered well before the date it's needed (which might be a couple of weeks before the wedding if, for instance, the wedding is abroad, then probably that is reasonable. On the other hand, the shop might be able to replace it in a week, but that's no help if that weeks puts it three days after the wedding! Circumstances will be important, which is why the statute uses terms like "reasonable" and significant.
Anyway, I'm not a lawyer, so I don't claim I'm not able to be wrong on all this (despite Splash's apparent faith :)), but that's my understanding of a very far from clear situation..
Just to keep everyone in the loop (and to ensure that the whole story is told) Wesley at Scan sent me a PM asking for further details of my order (Invoice Number and Query number). About 10 mins after I sent them Wesley phoned me and apologised for the hassle I have had. he stated that I should have been offered repair, replace/refund and that the query had been dealt with by CS rather than returns dept. As EEE already sent to Asus there wasn't much more Wesley could do but he has restored my faith in Scan.
Cheers Wesley :rockon2: