Rights Under RMA

[Will01]

Hi Guys,

Im hoping for any guidance I can get here.

I recently RMA'd a faulty motherboard to SCAN. The motherboard to me was DOA. It either powered on and straight back off again (the CPU fan wouldn't spin which scan stated was probably a fault heatsink and offered to replace there and then). Or it didnt power on at all.

So I called scan, recieved an RMA number 370896 and sent it back.

Today I recieved contact from SCAN telling me the RMA was rejected due to bent CPU socket pins.

I called them to query this and was given 2 options. They can return it to me (still faulty so I don't know how this helps) or send it to Gigabyte for repair at a cost to myself of £25.

So basically, in my view, they are saying I broke this.

Now, i've been building PC's for the guts of 15 odd years now and I am certain I would not have done this. Fair enough, I didnt check the board for defects upon receipt but i've never needed to before.

Also, I feel that on the same level I could simply blame their engineer for bending them. All I know is that I definately didnt damage these pins.

So whether the fault lies with SCAN. Gigabyte or maybe even my original delivery driver am I basically SOL?

I initially told scan to send it back to gigabyte then decided to have them return it to me first.

But the more I think about it, the more this just doesnt sit with me. I feel like im being shafted here. Does trading standards protect me here?

Many Thanks,

Will

PS Apologies for my tone. I am rather frustrated right now. I've used SCAN many times in the past. But this has left a very sour taste in my mouth.

[kalniel]

This is unfortunately a fairly frequent occurrence, and without other retailers being as open on their forums we don't know if it's higher for SCAN than for others. The burden of proof is on the retailer to prove the product was without fault when it arrived at you, but they usual get around that with unsatisfactory goods must be inspected before they are signed for type things. You may get some traction by going down this line and saying it's unreasonable to be able to inspect the goods that thoroughly at the time of delivery. It's also unreasonable for you to have to deduce the cause of error - that should be their job, certainly within the first 6 months.

In essence the contention is that they delivered a faulty part. They may have proof that it left the factory without issue (unusual, but possible), in which case the claim is with the delivery - but that's still their responsibility, not yours.

[Mark@SCAN]

Hi,

I will include some pictures of the socket on the returned board so that you can see the reason for our rejection.

There are a couple of points I would like to pick up on from your post.

Please note that no testing has or now can be carried out by SCAN at any point to the motherboard in question. It was simply rejected following a visual inspection prior to testing as happens with all items returned for a reported fault. As such I would have to refute the suggestion the damage has been caused by our staff.

If the board arrived from Gigabyte like that then we would have to question why you would proceed to install a CPU into what is quite clearly a damaged CPU socket? please remember that you are responsible for reporting damage within a reasonable length of time following receipt of the goods and and in addition you would be responsible for any damage caused as a result of incorrect handling or installation of the goods we supply which as I hope with respect you will agree from the pictures appears to be the case.

I can see that you have contacted us and an agreement has been reached for us to return the board on your behalf to Gigabyte for a chargeable repair to the CPU socket.

[Will01]

Hi Mark,

So basically you are saying that I caused the damage to the CPU socket. I am simply expected to accept this? I find it hard to believe this damage was present when I returned it. As the CPU wouldn't have sat flush to the socket which would have been easily noticed by myself.

Also the CPU shows no obvious signs of damage.

You are not willing to accept a possible fault by yourselves so I am unsure why I should just accept fault without question ?

I returned the motherboard as it will not power on. The motherboard was cosmetically fine before it left myself. So I am left with no other option than to assume damage caused by your engineer or in transit.

[Mark@SCAN]

Hi Will,

I have no direct proof that you have caused the damage that is present to the CPU socket on the returned motherboard and as such would not make a direct accusation as such.

Whilst I would never suggest we are above causing accidental damage we are insured against such occurrences so it would not make sense for us to try and deny responsibility for causing damage if indeed that were the case. However as advised previously we have not at any point carried out any testing of the motherboard and I would suggest it very difficult to cause damage to the CPU socket without actually having any interaction with it other than to take the picture which shows that it is significantly damaged. I'm also confused by your suggestion of the pins being bent in transit how exactly would that happen given that there is no damage to the outer packaging for the motherboard? Finally it should be noted that the plastic CPU socket protector that was supplied with the motherboard originally was not returned with the motherboard. I hope you will agree that on the balance of probability the damage is likely to have been caused post delivery to yourself rather than pre delivery or after your return to SCAN.

You have every right to question why the board has been rejected however we have provided an honest and valid reason for our rejection, there are only so many ways we can inform you that the item returned is damaged and subsequently has been rejected, I do not expect you to be happy about this but expect that you respect our reasons why.

Regards

[Will01]

Hi Mark,

I feel I am going to have to contact trading standards regarding this for further advice.

[Will01]

Hi Mark,

I feel I am going to have to contact trading standards regarding this for further advice.

Hello Again Mark,

I have now spoken to someone regarding my consumer rights.

I have also taken a picture of my CPU which is completely mark free (I think you will agree it is difficult to bend pins without also damaging the CPU), I will upload this later as proof when I return home.

I am certain the CPU pins where undamaged when the item left myself and have been damaged by yourselves (as you say, you are insured so why you are fighting against this I have no idea).

Having recieved advice which leads to me to believe the burden of proof lies with yourselves to prove you did not cause damage to the motherboard.

I feel it would of been impossible for me to damage the board without damaging the CPU. Also the fact that I did not return the socket cover was an oversight. I had sucessfully installed the CPU, Heatink and all other components before I realised the motherboard was dead on arrival. I did not 'breadboard' the device before hand.

I am giving yourselves one last chance to offer a replacements before I take this to Watchdog and also make a formal complaint regarding this.

If you could simply reply confirming your final stance on the matter I will take next steps accordingly.

Many Thanks,

Will

[Mark@SCAN]

Hi Will,

I am unsure as to why you are focussed on the CPU? the damage to the CPU socket on the motherboard could have been caused even without installing the CPU either before your installation or afterwards.

The bottom of these intel CPU's are flat so i'm afraid I don't see the relevance of the CPU not having a mark on it being proof of anything? If you are suggesting that because the pins on the motherboard are damaged then in turn so would the underside of the CPU I am afraid I would have to disagree. And if that really were the case wouldn't that only further show the board we supplied to you could not have been delivered to you damaged as by your logic if we delivered a damaged motherboard your CPU in turn would also be damaged?

Do you have any evidence to show as you have claimed that the CPU socket was not damaged prior to leaving your possession? or that the board has been damaged by our staff?

Regards

[Will01]

Mark,

I shouldn't have to prove that I did not damage the board. The burden of proof fall's on yourselves proving you didnt damage it.

I did not think to take a picture before it left myself as I had no idea you would do this.

I do not understand how you can ask me to prove the board did not leave myself with the damaged pins when you have offered no proof that your engineer did not perhaps damage it by any number of means upon receipt.

Will

[Mark@SCAN]

I think you are confusing what the sales of goods act states in regards to goods supplied that are not: as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. Within 6 months the burden of proof is on the retailer to prove that at the time of sale the goods conformed to contract.

Given that the board has been returned back to us and is physically damaged there is no way for us test it for your reported fault, as I am sure you will agree this poses a problem.

However it seems that you accept the damage in question was not on the board when it was delivered to you originally?

in itself not returning the CPU socket protector on the motherboard could be considered negligence on your part, however you pass this off as an "oversight"

Ultimately we have offered to return the board to our supplier in an attempt to get it repaired for you, if you do not wish for us to take this action and seek alternative remedy please do so.

Regards

[excalibur2]

Hi Mark
AAMOI if we take out the optional insurance (which sometimes I do) for computer parts then would scan automatically changed that part for cases like this?

[joncre]

WOW.

I have stumbled upon this thread as I was considering placing my first order with Scan. (I am a regular shopper at Ebuyer and others) I can confirm that after reading the above dialogue between this customer and the representative for Scan that I will not be placing any order.

I cannot believe that a company the size of Scan are handling a case of this nature in the way that they are.

Mark, I'm not sure if you are making the decision to enter public dialogue with the customer on your own accord in the manner that you are, but I would seriously consider that you speak to your superiors about this case as you are handling it in the most unprofessional manner.

For you to post those pictures on a public forum is very unprofessional. First of all, there is no proof that this is the item that the customer returned to you. Secondly, even if this is the item that was returned by the customer, he has already confirmed several times that the board was not returned in the state that you are describing. On that basis alone, you should not be entering in to a 'tit for tat' argument with a customer on a public forum.

If a representative is responding publically to the customer, it should only be that you are taking care of the issue and refunding the customer, to give a good impression and know that the customer is valued. Because of your inept handling of this, you have left a very bad impression on this forum. I doubt the customer will be trading with Scan again (despite him making several orders in the past) and I for one, have no plan in plans of placing would have been a quite large order with Scan.


I would seriously consider resolving this matter promptly, in favour of the customer before any more damage is done.

It goes without saying that good customer service lies with giving the customer the benefit of the doubt (especially in a case like this) and also considering as he has already stated he is not a first time buyer. Worst of all, that board could be worth no more than £150.


This is seriously embarrassing.

Good luck Will

[excalibur2]

H'mm joncre...... with one post you could be a friend of will.

[joncre]

I could be, but I am not. Regardless, what I have said still stands.

[Will01]

I think you are confusing what the sales of goods act states in regards to goods supplied that are not: as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. Within 6 months the burden of proof is on the retailer to prove that at the time of sale the goods conformed to contract.

Given that the board has been returned back to us and is physically damaged there is no way for us test it for your reported fault, as I am sure you will agree this poses a problem.

However it seems that you accept the damage in question was not on the board when it was delivered to you originally?

in itself not returning the CPU socket protector on the motherboard could be considered negligence on your part, however you pass this off as an "oversight"

Ultimately we have offered to return the board to our supplier in an attempt to get it repaired for you, if you do not wish for us to take this action and seek alternative remedy please do so.

Regards

Mark,

I am absolutely disgusted that you are treating me like this. First, you call me a liar. Second you ask me to prove I did not damage the board so clearly you expect me to do your job for you. Now, you are calling me negligent.

I also notice from the replies by other to this very thread that people realise what you are doing is a very shady business practise. I am now taking a screendump of your replies as I am unsure if you are able to have this thread removed to save face.

I cannot believe as a long term customer I am being treated like this. I feel it is a terrible business practice to damage an item they return to you simply to avoid having to replace it.

The issue of the insurance is also an interesting one. As of now, I feel I should be contacting my credit card company to request a chargeback and simply placing an order elsewhere.

I know that the charge the bank incur's to process the chargeback is levied back onto the supplier i.e. yourselves.

This is quite possibly the worst customer service I have ever recieved and you can be assured that I will not be backing down and will be advising my customer's to never use yourselves.

This was a personal build but I have recommended yourselves to many friends in the past. You can be assured this will stop.

Joncre - thank you for your words of support.

Will

[joncre]

in itself not returning the CPU socket protector on the motherboard could be considered negligence on your part, however you pass this off as an "oversight"

SMH