Broken PSU and retailer refusing RMA due to 28 day clause?

[Bane]

Just after some clarification about dealing with an online retailer who no longer stocks the product, and has told me twice now to deal directly with the manufacturer.

I've been reading about consumer legislation at Consumer Direct gov site and it seems like they are trying to fob me off, but wanted to check all the same

The PSU has failed twice now within 10 months of use (less than that considering turn around time of first repair).

Originally I sent it for direct repair to the distributor, as advised by the retailer. I wasn't that impressed with the repair, as a plastic card fell from the inside the PSU three days after being fitted. So, to me, it seemed a bit of budged repair even though the unit carried on working fine.

Now that the PSU has failed again, I am not interested in a simple repair as I doubt the reliability of the PSU. And the additional expense of sending it for repair has increased again.

The retailer has refused a refund/credit note, and my second message they declined a replacement of a different brand of similar spec/value.

[Andeh13]

I cant comment on the online seller, but having delt with Samsung, Corsair, Logitech and Western directly i found them to be on pay with any seller in terms of sorting it. So if the sellers is being difficult, name & shame (providing you've given them a chance) and then feel safe in theknowledge the manufacturers tend to be just as good.

From my experience with the likes of Samsung they did a straight swop, them dropping off a new one(22" screen) & picking up the old one within 5 days. Corsair were just plain _fantastic_ when a faulty PSU cable blew a few HDDs & DVD drives, they just bought me new ones & i had them all back in my PC within a week and Logitech are just god like with their customer service. They just replace the product no questions asked & just require a photo/proof of destroying the replaced product. WD just take a few weeks 2 turn around a HDD but having delt with them 3-4 times iv never had any complaints.

All of the above have been utterly utterly bullet proof in terms of customer service, so 9 times out of 10, id go direct to them instead of going through the seller (well, WD aside due to turn around time anyway).



edit; Which companies/manufacturers are we talking about here?

[Lucio]

AFAIK if 6 months have passed since the initial repair, the onus falls to yourself to prove that the repair was substandard. More importantly, even if you do go to the time and effort to prove it (and that means expert proof), you aren't entitled for a full refund from the retailer as you've already had some use out of it.

Best bet in these cases usually is the manufacturer, as many will repair/replace from stock without worrying about the devolved value (as they can often make use of the parts from failed units). So it honestly sounds like the retailer is using their experience to get the best solution given the bad situation.

[Bane]

AFAIK if 6 months have passed since the initial repair, the onus falls to yourself to prove that the repair was substandard. More importantly, even if you do go to the time and effort to prove it (and that means expert proof), you aren't entitled for a full refund from the retailer as you've already had some use out of it.

Best bet in these cases usually is the manufacturer, as many will repair/replace from stock without worrying about the devolved value (as they can often make use of the parts from failed units). So it honestly sounds like the retailer is using their experience to get the best solution given the bad situation.

I can understand a full refund not being offered as this has all happened within 11 months of purchase. But it surprises me the retailer is sticking to the line of it's outside 28 days so go deal with the manufacturer directly.

Out of interest I have contacted the distributor that is responsible for UK warranty, since the PSU manufacturer no longer operates in this county (or in that capacity anyway). And I've not received a reply back from them. Maybe they have a limited operation so I can't expect 48 hour reply, or are being just as stubborn as the retailer.

[Saracen]

AFAIK if 6 months have passed since the initial repair, the onus falls to yourself to prove that the repair was substandard. More importantly, even if you do go to the time and effort to prove it (and that means expert proof), you aren't entitled for a full refund from the retailer as you've already had some use out of it.

Best bet in these cases usually is the manufacturer, as many will repair/replace from stock without worrying about the devolved value (as they can often make use of the parts from failed units). So it honestly sounds like the retailer is using their experience to get the best solution given the bad situation.

Not quite, no.

There's two ways to look at this .... product warranty and consumer rights.

A warranty might ne issued by either seller or manufacturer, or even both. It might well be for 12 months, but could be for longer. Generally, the seller isn't liable for servicing the warranty the manufacturer issues, so the shop might well be correct in advising going to the manufacturer for warranty claims if it's a manufacturer's warranty. It might also well be the case that that is the best, easiest and fastest way to resolve a problem if the manufacturer has a good warranty.

But then there's the consumer rights legislation. Assuming this item was bought by a consumer (because it's a bit different if it was bought by a business), then the shop can't just wash their hands of those rights. They are enforceable by law, and for up to six years (in England and Wales, and again, it's a bit different in Scotland).

However .... consumer rights weaken quite a bit after 6 months from the time of purchase, and the OP is well past that now.

There's a few quirks and twists, but essentially, any product should last a "reasonable" time, with "reasonable" depending on the nature of the product and the circumstances. The example I usually use is that you'd expect a new car to last a bit longer than a banana. That makes it clear that it's hard to define how long "reasonable" is ... but in terms of consumer electronics, it's likely to be several years.

So, if products don't last several years, the issue is ... why not? Did they fail because they'd been overused? Did they fail because they;d been tampered with, damaged, misused or abused, etc? Or did they fail because of poor quality manufacturing or materials, or a design defect?

Essentially, if the fault existed when the goods were bought, the buyer is protected by consumer rights. So if it's due, for instance, to sub-standard components in the PSU meaning that they don't last a "reasonable" time, then the OP has a claim and it is most emphatically against the shop, not the manufacturer.

But here's the problem.

For the first 6 months after sale, if a fault develops, the presumption by statute is that the fault was "inherent" (i.e. present at time of sale) unless the seller can prove otherwise. In other words, they'd have to prove that the problem was due to something the buyer did to or with the product rather than to the product just not being "satisfactory quality". But after 6 months, that burden of proof reverses, and the buyer now has to prove that what caused the failure was inherent in the product, and if he can't prove that, the seller isn't liable.

So, Bane, as I see it (and I'm not a lawyer), your situation is now this .....

1) Most shops are reasonable, and in situations like this, will act fairly. You seem to have found one that's being hardline, and it sounds like they're unfair (having only heard one side iof the story, of course) but they might be within their rights.

2) If you have a manufacturer warranty, that might well be your best option, to avoid having to use option 3).

3) Pursue your consumer rights. It sounds like you have a decent case, given what you've said, and it certainly soulnds like a sub-standard product. The question is, are the shop going to be reasonable about it? You might have legal rights, but are you prepared to commit to the cost, hassle and time potentially involved in pursuing them?

If you go back to the shop, quote the Sale of Goods Act etc and they fold and replace or refund, then fine. But if they don't, consumer rights aren't a magic formula. At the end of it all, if they refuse to budge, are you prepared to take them to court? Because that's the only was you can force them to act .... and you might not win.

So, court .... fill in the forms, and pay the (fairly modest) fee. You'll probably need to get the PSU inspected by an independent engineer (approved by the court) to give an opinion on why the PSU failed. You have to pay for that report, and it'll probably cost a fair bit more than the PSU is worth, though you would probably get that, and your costs including court fee, back .... if you win. If you don't win, you're stuffed in relation to the PSU and you're down by the court fee (probably of the order of £50, though I haven't checked recently), the cost of the report and any other incidental expernses, such as travel costs. And you have the time and hassle wasted too.

So .... are you prepared to risk ending up a lot worse off? Are you prepared to stand on your principles, and take the risk? Because if you aren't, the fact that the shop have a potential liability under consumer law isn't going to help you, and they can "fob you off" unless you're prepared to act to force the issue.

The only other option is the bluff. While you won't want the risk of the costs, or the hassle of a (small claim) court case, the odds are .... neither will the shop. If you just threaten to sue, they'll probably dismiss that as retailers know that 99.9% (or whatever) of the time, that's just hot air. If you get the court claim form, spend the time to complete it, and then show them the completed claim ready to send to the court, they might take the threat more seriously and settle to avoid the hassle. At this point, you haven't spent much money or paid any fees, so it's a cheap bluff.

BUt if they call your bluff, you then have two choices .... back off, write off the PSU and chalk it up to experience, or pay the fee and submit the claim. And that stage, the level 2 bluff commences. Will the company actually defend the claim? They might just decide to concede, or they might decide to fight. Or they might just do nothing, in which case you'll have to attend the court on the due date and will get judgement by default if they don't show up. But now you've got to enforce that judgement. What if they still won't pay up? You're going to be back in court getting enforcement action taken, and the costs go up at that point.

And even if you do win, and do take enforcement action, economic times are hard. How financially stable are the company? Because if it's a small shop and they go bust, court order or not, you'll likely get neither the cost of the PSU or the court fees and report costs back. You can't get blood out of a stone, and a court order is only worth the paper it's written on if it can be successfully enforced.

In other words, yes, it sounds like they're fobbing you off. But are you prepared to commit to the hassle and costs of pushing this as far as it might need to be pushed. I've been down this line several times and, so far, have yet to fail. But that's because when I get treated badly, I get annoyed enough to be quite prepared to take it to court and, if I lose and it costs me money, so be it ... at least I'll have had the pleasure of causing them the hassle of fighting it. But I have yet to lose.

My attitude is I'm doing it out of principle, but it could equally well be viewed as doing it out of pique. Either way, I don't mind. I quite enjoy the challenge and thrive on the fight, so I'm prepared to invest the time and risk losing the money. Are you?


Reminder .... I am not a lawyer. The above is opinion. not advice. If in doubt, seek qualified legal advice.

[Bane]

Thanks for the informative post Saracen. As you mentioned it does come down to the amount of resources the customer wishes to expend to resolve the problem.

I'm awaiting a reply back from the retailer who is either ignoring my latest message, or it's awaiting action by a manager. I assume that this common business practice for this retailer, and if most customers accept it at face value and leave them alone then the strategy has worked.

[Saracen]

.... I assume that this common business practice for this retailer, and if most customers accept it at face value and leave them alone then the strategy has worked.

I would assume so too. Some shops go out of their way to give good customer service ... John Lewis comes to mind. Others are rather the opposite. With some, especially smaller shops, it's because they either don't know where their responsibilities start and stop, or because they have a personal vested interest in not honouring them if they can help it. Of course, that can be short-termism because if they do a customer over like this, they've almost certainly lost your custom (or at least, would have lost mine) ... and that of anybody I can get to listen to the story.

But yeah, I suspect that a lot of retailers believe, with good reason, that a lot of people complaining will blow a lot of hot air, often spout "Sale of Goods Act like its a magic passphrase, and often be wrong about what their rights are. But most people won't, if out comes to it, bother to follow it up.

There have even been suggestions that some retailers, as a policy, only react if people complain loudly enough. There's an old adage, and in my view, it's usually true .... "it's the squeaky wheel that gets oiled".

That's why the "bluff" strategy often works. If they believe you're just complaining, some places will ignore you because, much of the time, people end up going away, and they've out-bluffed the consumer. If they really believe you mean to take it as far as court, well, for the sake of the costs involved over a PSU, is it worth the going through the hassle? Probably not. At that point, you've out-bluffed them.

But, just as I will take it to court, on 'principle' if I believe I'm in the right, they will be those retailers that will be prepared to let it go to court, regardless of the hassle, if they feel they're in the right. You can't, therefore, assume that a "bluff" will always necessarily work, even if you are prepared to follow through with it.

[Bane]

Glad to report that the retailer agreed to exchange the unit, once I bypassed front-line support. So the actions of the manager has restored some confidence in the company.

[Behemoth]

Out of interest who were they ? No harm in naming now seeing as they have sorted it ?