Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 64 of 203

Thread: Overclockers.co.uk - The Saga Continues.

  1. #49
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts
    Originally posted by petrefax
    probably not a great deal of help but you could get your £30 back straight away by contacting your CC company & requesting a chargeback - if you've not authorised this payment (which you haven't) then your CC will instantly recharge their bank for the £30 - in this instance its the responsibility of their bank to prove you authorised the transaction, which they obviously cannot

    ok, so you're still down £300+ but its a start
    Ah, but you have authorised it.

    When you buy from a company you are (in most circumstances, and depending on exactly how their website works) accepting their terms and conditions. That this charge will be made is part of theior terms and conditions. It actually says £20 plus return shipping costs, and then VAT.

    Look at it from their point of view - in the general sense - not in the context of this case.

    They flog a product, and get it sent back as non-working. I;d guess that in a fair percentage of cases, the product works just fine and the buyer is simply getting it wrong. Or alternatively, the buyer had damaged the goods. I was standning in Watford Electronics one day several years ago and a bloke was moaning (very loadly) about a defective CPU, and how he wanted his money back, and right now or he was going to do this, that, and the other (Watchdog, etc).

    The salesman asked him which way round the CPU wad been when put in the socket. Blank look from customer. "Well, how was it oriented" said the support guy. More blank looks. "It's square," says the support guy, "so it can go in the socket in four different ways (he demonstrates), so which way round di you insert it?".

    "What does it matter," says the guy, "it don't <bleep> work."

    At which point (yeah, you've guessed it) the support guy turns it other, points out the bent pins, points out the orientation markings in the Socket A slot and tells the guy that THIS iswhy it didn't work - and is now damaged. The irate customer still won't have it, and demands his money back. It ended with the bloke swearing and cursing, and being told to leave the premises or the police would be called.


    Operations like OcUK HAVE to operate a policy of only replacing or refunding if there are good reasons, and not just because the customer is a twerp, or the goods have been damaged. If they didn't, they'd have to be charging PC World-level prices. They are quite within their rights to test returned products, and to charge if the products are not faulty. It all takes time, and costs money, to do, so why shoyuld they pay for it if the fault is not theirs.


    It has also been suggested that the entire system be returned for testing. Two things about that. Firstly, their returns policy states explicitly that RMA's are issued with respect to specific goods only, and that other goods are NOT to be returned.
    RMA's are issued for specific products only. Please do not send other items not covered by the RMA such as full systems
    You MIGHT have better luck going there with the whole system, but I'd suggest doing it by prior appointment. Otherwise, you can't expect their staff to drop everything just because you walk through the door expecting instant action.

    Also, when you buy a product, it is expectedto not be faulty, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will work with YOUR hardware. If you bought two items together, you can reasonably expect them to work together. If you explicitly stated what the items were going to be used in (i.e. that the video card you buy will be used in a specific motherboard) then they legally MUST be compatible. But, there have been occasions when I've bought Socket A motherboards and 478 processors, because I was building various machines, and they were the bits I needed for completion, in conjunction with components I already had, or had ordered elsewhere. It is NOT the supplier's responsibilty to ensure that the buyer knows what he is doing. It is the buyers - to either be competent, or two explain EXPLICITLY what he wants, if he wants to be sure to be protected.


    Returning to this specific situation, I would first try all reasonable steps. Explain to the shop, and or Spie himself, exactly what the problem is, that the goods have been independently tested by TWO other organisations and found to be faulty. Give them opportunity to sort the problem out. I would also ensure that any further communications on this matter were send by recorded delivery.

    I would not, at this stage, start threatening small claims court, or watchdog, etc. For a start, as soon as you start talking about Watchdog, you will achieve two things - you will annoy the shop, and quite possibly causethem to react by saying "well, go ahead then". Secondly, it is a hollow threat. Watchdog will NOT be interested in something like this. It isn't 'sexy' enough and wouldn't make good TV.

    I would also contact my local country court, and get the necessary forms for a claim in the small claims court. I'd start filling them in, reading up onthe necessary procedures and documentation, and be ready to move to that stage.

    If, despite all reasonable attempts to get OcUK to sort the problem out, they refuse to budge, then you have a genuine trade dispute on your hands and there is only one practical course left open to you. Small Claims Court. Let the court decide who is in the right and who is in the wrong.

    IF, repeat IF the circumstances are exactly as described, and if OcUK do not have a convincing rebuttal, then you should win such a case, and can claim damages for breach of contract, including the refund of the credit card charges and, for that matter, the costs of returning the products to OcUK and court fees, etc.

    If, repeat if the circumstances are as described, I doubt OcUK will let it get that far, as they must be aware they would probably lose. However, we only have one side of the story here, and it is not beyond possibility that OcUK have a good response, and one that just might be valid in court. If you push it to a court, and lose, you'll end up with your cosur costs too. Those costs are delberately kept low for small claims court, but it could yet end up costing you more than it has already.

    There are a couple of things to keep in mind, though. OcUK may well be obliged to repair or replace faulty components, but are quite possibly NOT obliged to refund you your original purchase price.

    If the goods are faulty ON DELIVERY, you CAN demand your money back. This is because the trader has failed to meet their obligations under the contract - the process is called "recission". However, you only have a "reasonable" time, after delivery, to inspect the goods and contact the trader to notify them of the fault. "Reasonable" is not defined anywhere, and will likely vary accordingtothe nature and complexity of the goods. But in any event, it is likely to be days, or a week or two, and is VERY unlikely to be as long as a month.

    It is POSSIBLE that a fault might exost on delivery that is not noticable right away. If that happens, and IF you ordered the goods long-distance (i.e. mail-order, internet, etc rather than buying in a shop) then within the first 6 months the trader has to prove that the goods were NOT faulty on delivery, rather than you having to prove they were. So, the 6-month cut-off can be important.

    However, in this case, it has already been stated that the goods were working, and then stopped. THAT effectively hands OcUK the proof they need that the goods were not faulty on delivery. Unless OcUK were notified ofthis problem within the first couple of weeks after delivery, then almost certainly a court will hold that the goods were not faulty on delivery, and that they ahave been "accepted". The right to a refund is therefore lost.

    What you DO still have, if the goods are gone faulty after "acceptance" is the right to repair or replacement. You might still get offered a refund, but cannot require one.

    I have to say that, were I OcUK, I would be suspicious about a motherboard AND video card that were BOTH working, and then BOTH fail. Even if the goods are now defective,then the question remains "why?".

    Did they fail, or were they damaged?

    Was there user-error. Was the card removed while power was present on the mobo - especially considering the soft-power-on status of modern mobo's? Was there a PSU fault? Was there an external mains voltage issue?

    I'm puzzled by BOTH products suddenly just developing faults, unless something caused it.

    And if it WERE some external factor, the fault of a PSU (not supplied by OcUK) or user-error, then OcUK have no liability in replacing goods damaged this way.


    I have no reason to love OcUK, and as some here may know, have had my own run-in wth Spie. My own forums, the Digital Darkroom is, so far as I know, still a banned link at OcUK. I have no reason to stand up for him or his company BUT - sincethey are either not aware ofthis thread, or choose not to participate in it, I feel that it is necessary to redress the balance somewhat.

    I have a lot of sympathy for Vaul, and right may be entirely on his side. However, we have not had the other side of the story. OcUK may well have very good reasons for taking the stance they have taken.

    As I said, I have no reason to love OcUK, but my own experience with them has been that when I have had a problem, it has been sorted out very expeditiously and to my entire satisfaction. Also, on these occasions, I had ordered anonymously and OcUK had NO IDEA that I was one of their moderators at the time, so had no reason to give me preferential treatment.

  2. #50
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,159
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked
    1,605 times in 1,044 posts
    Originally posted by Saracen
    I would also contact my local country court, and get the necessary forms for a claim in the small claims court. I'd start filling them in, reading up onthe necessary procedures and documentation, and be ready to move to that stage.
    Should it get this far, the form for small claims is a "N1 Claim form".
    You can get your local court information from http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/

    Feel free to fill this in, in preperation, but you should goto trading standards and seek their help first, as if you go directly to a small claims without their intervention, they will only tell you to go through trading standards first.

    Having said that - Saracen has summed it up perfectly. At this stage you need to be 101% sure that they are both faulty.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  3. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    8,629
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked
    268 times in 188 posts
    I have written proof from 2 seperate, highly respected PC repair firms, that the items are both faulty.

    Every system they have been tested in has failed to work.

    Every person with a high level of PC knowledge who has tried to get the items working, has failed.

    Is that 101%, or do I need to do something more? Happy to hear any other reccomendations...

  4. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    8,629
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked
    268 times in 188 posts
    I have to say that, were I OcUK, I would be suspicious about a motherboard AND video card that were BOTH working, and then BOTH fail. Even if the goods are now defective,then the question remains "why?".

    Did they fail, or were they damaged?
    I think it could be aruged, that as Overclockers claim that they have tested the items, and found them to be both working, that it is unlikely they can say that I have damaged them.

    I've contacted the repair firms invovled, and they have agreed to stand by their engineers report, that the items are faulty, should it be needed as proof, for any organisation.

    Which is nice.

    I'll keep you informed...

  5. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    I'am not telling you
    Posts
    203
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    omfg wot a bunch of f******* they did the same to me about a year ago! and the staff there are a bunch of the sadest and the most rudest people u can meet! they think they know all and that they look at you as if u were an ant waiting to be crushed! keep us informed of wot happens!

  6. #54
    Hexus.Jet TeePee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Gallup, NM
    Posts
    5,070
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked
    636 times in 366 posts
    Better to go to the credit card company before the small claims court.

    The additional charges may be in the T&C's but that probably makes them unlawful. Even so, not all companies have this clause (and OcUK is the only one I've heard of inforcing it), which is a good enough reason for me to take my business elsewhere.

  7. #55
    bored.gamer Yosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southerner
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked
    64 times in 53 posts
    I have written proof from 2 seperate, highly respected PC repair firms,
    You still havent told us who these 2 companies are?

    If there that respected why didnt buy the bits from them and what make and model is that psu you have.

    People will try to help but its good to give some information back.
    Insert signature here.


  8. #56
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts
    Originally posted by Vaul
    I have written proof from 2 seperate, highly respected PC repair firms, that the items are both faulty.

    Every system they have been tested in has failed to work.

    Every person with a high level of PC knowledge who has tried to get the items working, has failed.

    Is that 101%, or do I need to do something more? Happy to hear any other reccomendations...
    It's certainly difficult to think of anything else you could reasonably be expected to do.

    So far as a court (if it gets that far) is concerned, however, you can never be entirely sure what is 101%, especially until you hear the other party's arguments.
    Originally posted by Vaul
    I'll keep you informed...
    Please do. I'm interested to hear how this turns out, and I bet I'm not the only one.

    Originally posted by Vaul
    Happy to hear any other reccomendations...
    A suggestion rather than a recommendation. Suggest to OcUK that the items be sent to a mutually agreed independent testing facility to see who is right .... do they work or not? Whoever is wrong pays for the test, and both sides will be bound to accept the verdict.

    If the independent tester gets them working, you accept that. If they don't, OcUK replaces then or refunds your money (including the 'test' fee they charged, AND the cost of you shipping the goods back to them).

    Of course, they are not obliged to agree to something like this, but it's a suggestion.

  9. #57
    Beard hat ftw! steve threlfall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    6,743
    Thanks
    302
    Thanked
    192 times in 123 posts
    • steve threlfall's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • Core i5-3570K
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 830 256
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon HD6870
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX750
      • Case:
      • Antec P280
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 WFP 24" Widescreen, Rev A04
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 120/12 mb
    Originally posted by Pigboy
    You still havent told us who these 2 companies are?

    If there that respected why didnt buy the bits from them and what make and model is that psu you have.

    People will try to help but its good to give some information back.
    Presumably the companies are local pc shops and therefore you wont have a clue what hes talking about. No computer shop i know sells 9800pro's most can barely muster an fx5200 let alone a midrange card and espceially not high end jit like this. He says the psu works end of story.

    Sorry to hear about this Vaul. And thanks for the warning.

  10. #58
    Hexus.Jet TeePee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Gallup, NM
    Posts
    5,070
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked
    636 times in 366 posts
    On consultation, the charging of a 'Testing Fee' is unlawful. When you purchase you agree to their terms and conditions, and form a contract of sale which includes agreeing to the testing fee. If you returned working goods, which they tested and found working, then they can charge you the fee as per their T&C's, but here's the important bit. They can't charge an amount to your credit card without it being specifically authorised. They could send you an invoice for the amount (by e-mail or otherwise) and give you the opportunity to pay it by credit card, and they could also take you to court for failing to pay it, but they can't charge your card without authorisation.

  11. #59
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts
    Originally posted by TeePee
    On consultation, the charging of a 'Testing Fee' is unlawful. When you purchase you agree to their terms and conditions, and form a contract of sale which includes agreeing to the testing fee. If you returned working goods, which they tested and found working, then they can charge you the fee as per their T&C's, but here's the important bit. They can't charge an amount to your credit card without it being specifically authorised. They could send you an invoice for the amount (by e-mail or otherwise) and give you the opportunity to pay it by credit card, and they could also take you to court for failing to pay it, but they can't charge your card without authorisation.
    Agreed, but as the testing fee, AND the fact that it is will be charged to your card, is in the terms and conditions that you accept when you buy, and by implication, when you request an RMA, it could be argued that you HAVE specifically authorised it by using the RMA procedure.

  12. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,069
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    7 times in 3 posts
    Why do they still have you credit card details on record anyway?
    I you hadnt returned the hardware when would they have bothered to get rid of the data? Or would they have kept it indefinately???

    Originally posted by Saracen
    It is POSSIBLE that a fault might exost on delivery that is not noticable right away. If that happens, and IF you ordered the goods long-distance (i.e. mail-order, internet, etc rather than buying in a shop) then within the first 6 months the trader has to prove that the goods were NOT faulty on delivery, rather than you having to prove they were. So, the 6-month cut-off can be important.

    However, in this case, it has already been stated that the goods were working, and then stopped. THAT effectively hands OcUK the proof they need that the goods were not faulty on delivery. Unless OcUK were notified ofthis problem within the first couple of weeks after delivery, then almost certainly a court will hold that the goods were not faulty on delivery, and that they ahave been "accepted". The right to a refund is therefore lost.

    What you DO still have, if the goods are gone faulty after "acceptance" is the right to repair or replacement. You might still get offered a refund, but cannot require one.
    So when I accept a parcel I recieve in the post I have to sign for it (if its RMSD or whatever), and I also write unchecked in the box as well, so that you are covered.
    Unfortunatly I dont think your postie would be too impressed if you unpacakge all you hardware and leaving it benchmarking overnight while he waits for a signature to confirm that it works
    For the future: Always marked recieved goods and Unchecked/Untested.

    It is important when you found this problem? Was it within 7 days of recieving the goods? If so you can return it and get a full refund from the long distance selling regulations, and say any reason like "I didnt like the colour" and that is valid under the law. I *think* its something like that...you might like to check that.
    Twigman

  13. #61
    Hexus.Jet TeePee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Gallup, NM
    Posts
    5,070
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked
    636 times in 366 posts
    It could be, and if anyone ever goes to court with this please let me know, because I'd love to watch. Of the top of my head I'd say this doesn't constitute authorisation because it's too unclear, where credit card payment authorisation must be very explicit, but exactly how explicit is something a court would have to decide. My ten pounds would be on overclockers losing, but I wouldn't bet anymore than that.

    In this case I'd still say explain the situation to the CC company, and shift the burden of proof to OcUK. Either way, please keep us informed! It's good to have a forum such as this which is independant and viewed by representatives from many computer retailers, and it's nice to think that it contributes to improved customer service. I appreciate it's hard for retailers to have a cost-effective RMA service when users have such a variety of expertise, but good service means repeat-business. I'd be willing to bet that OcUK have lost custom worth far more to them than the cost of sorting out this claim. In fact, I hope they have!

  14. #62
    Cable Guy Jonny M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Loughborough Uni
    Posts
    4,263
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 1 post
    I think by law they have to keep your credit card details. I'm not sure if they are kept in plain text, or just encrypted and linked to your name, so they can say "charge account number x £30" and it then takes it off the card.

    As for the 7 day distance selling regulations, that's only if the goods are unopened and in perfect condition.

  15. #63
    bored.gamer Yosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southerner
    Posts
    1,565
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked
    64 times in 53 posts
    Presumably the companies are local pc shops and therefore you wont have a clue what hes talking about.
    What wont i have a clue about?

    He says the psu works end of story
    It could have been his psu that killed the items?

    It is strange how the motherboard and video card dont work, did they both come sealed in there packets. The odd's of both items not working are high!

    Would still be good to find out who these two "highly respected PC repair firms".
    Insert signature here.


  16. #64
    Hexus.Jet TeePee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Gallup, NM
    Posts
    5,070
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked
    636 times in 366 posts
    The distance selling regulations do not specify that goods should be unopened, but only in 'as sold' condition. Many retailers consider this to mean unopened, and again this remains unchallenged in court. It is, IMO against the spirit of the regulations, which are designed to protect consumers.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •