Can't return bluetooth headset to Play.com?

[finlay666]

Recently ordered a Sennheiser VMX-100 headset, got it today (Royal Mail finally processing the mail in my area)

Tried connecting it to my X1, no luck, managed to connect to my K850i and then to my X1 but when I made a test call with the X1 it kept dropping in and out during the call, tried on the K850i and had the same issue.

Went to process the return but the bluetooth headset seems like it cannot be returned , everything else recently showed up.

Anyone else had problems returning specific items? Going to call them tomorrow to return it, not paying over £30 on a bluetooth headset that doesn't even connect properly!

[stavroshamster]

I would have thought there should be a 7-day no quibbles return policy by law - but I'm no expert.
Best to see what they say on the phone tomorrow.

[watercooled]

Sounds like it's faulty/not serving the purpose for which it was purchased so I'm fairly sure they would have to give you a refund.

[finlay666]

I know that, it just seems weird that of an order of 3 items (a dvd, a logitech remote and the headset) all ordered on the same date, all dispatched same day.... that only the headset shows up as unreturnable

[stavroshamster]

Maybe its cos its for inserting into orifices and is a health and safety hazard

Seriously though, its probably just a case of someone not setting the details up properly in their database...

Let us know what they say tomorrow.

[watercooled]

Most likely an error - you have the right to return it under DSR if it's unused or you can return it within normally a few weeks if it's DoA/faulty. Maybe it means you can't return it if it's been used because of hygiene reasons or something?

Edit: Beaten to it!

[jim]

They can refuse to let you return something for hygiene reasons if it's working and it's just a case of changing your mind, but then they can refuse to let you return something because you changed your mind for any reason.

As far as I know, if it's broken, it's in contravention of the SOGA and should be refunded - and that's all there is to it. Besides, it'll go straight into the dustbin anyway so hygiene is irrelevant.

Should be able to do a DSR, quoting the reason as being faulty and then Play.com have to pay to collect it - if I understand Saracen correctly

[dave87]

DSR would only work if you weren't claiming it was faulty?

SOGA is the one to go for - item not fit for purpose.

[jim]

DSR would only work if you weren't claiming it was faulty?

SOGA is the one to go for - item not fit for purpose.

Was basing it on this post by Saracen yesterday:

Assuming you got this from a retailer, use the DSR and cancel. Also, inform them that as the product did not match their description (assuming the description you mentioned was the seller's description), they are also in breach of the Sale of Goods Act and the collection will therefore be at their expense.

According to him you can combine the two?

[finlay666]

Play.com don't follow the UK law being in Jersey, going to call them in a bit to arrange a return

[watercooled]

But they trade in the UK so doesn't that mean they have to honour UK laws?

[Saracen]

But they trade in the UK so doesn't that mean they have to honour UK laws?

Do they?

They're based in Jersey, and customers contact them via the net, at which point they ship t the UK. But I bet if you read their T&Cs they'll be something in there saying the contract is formed under the laws of Jersey, which will determine any disputes.

Play.com don't follow the UK law being in Jersey, going to call them in a bit to arrange a return

Quite right, they don't, and the DSR has no binding effect on Jersey-based suppliers.

BUT ..... the Jersey law, the Distance Selling (Jersey) Law 2007, does.

You're a but lucky here, since though that's a 2007 law, it only came into effect on 1st September 2009, so you just squeaked in.

As for what it says, it's pretty close, from a quick perusal, to the DSR. So close, in fact, I'd say they've just copied it, filed off the serial numbers and given it a quick respray. I'm no legal expert and not a lawyer, so anything i say is really merely opinion and that's in relation to UK law, let alone Jersey law. But with that caveat, and also pointing out that those the DS(J)L may be very similar indeed to the DSR, some other aspects of Jersey law, within the context of which this operates also vary, so I've no doubt there are some subtle differences in operation, at the very least. And as I;ve only skimmed it and not read it in detail, let alone compared the two, all I will say is that it appears very similar indeed, and the Jersey government acknowledged that it's designed to reflect UK protections and to preserve Jersey's reputation for fair dealing.

So ..... if Play won't cooperate, don't mention our DSR, mention their DS(J)L and point it it is now in operation.

[Saracen]

DSR would only work if you weren't claiming it was faulty?

SOGA is the one to go for - item not fit for purpose.

Erm, no. Not quite.

Nothing in the DSR means the Sale of Goods Act doesn't operate, or nullifiers any of its rights.

You can use the DSR where goods aren't faulty, and where the SoGA wouldn't cover you. But that doesn't mean you can't use the DSR if they are faulty. In fact, that situation is explicitly covered.


If goods aren't faulty, you can use the DSR, within the cancellation period, to simply change your mind, and cancel. You must take "reasonable care" of the goods, and the supplier is entitled to have them back, either by them collecting or you sending them.

Assuming the supplier has provided the relevant information, and that their T&Cs stipulate that under those circumstances you have to cover the cost of the return, then either you have to pay to ship them back, or they can charge you the direct cost of collecting them. And, naturally, any supplier that's even half awake does include that stipulation. If they don;t, of course, then they can pay to get their own goods back. Either way, the cost of shipping the goods to you in the first place is refundable provided it's a standard delivery and therefore inherent in the basic contract, and not some special and separate service, like gift-wrapping, in which case, you probably can't get that back.

So, you buy something, change your mind and send it back. You get the cost of the goods, plus outbound shipping back.

BUT ... suppose you buy something, get it and it isn't what you ordered, or doesn't work properly, etc?

The DSR explicitly stipulates that IF you are entitled to cancel the contract under any other contract term, including those embedded implicitly by other legislation (like the Sale of Goods Act) then the provision that you get to pay to ship it back doesn't apply.

So the DSR and SoGA work in tandem. The default situation is that you get to pay return shipping, but where you could reject goods under the SoGA, like for them being incorrect, or not "satisfactory quality" or not "fit for purpose", the supplier has to either reimburse your shipping costs, or pay to collect.

Therefore, if you have goods that fail the SoGA rights, and if the DSR still applies, then you can cancel under the DSR and the SoGA merely means they pay for return shipping, not you. You could, of course, ignore the DSR and simply use the SoGA but as it's far less clearcut, I can't conceive of a reason why anyone would opt to do so.

[finlay666]

Called them, got an RMA number and they will refund the postage when it's received

Asked for a refund as apparently the headset does have problems with a number of phones.