Consumer rights question

[cliffords]

I purchased in person and collected in person a component from a component supplier .
I fitted the item and it did not function correctly . I returned the item personally to be told that no refund would be given as they insisted it would be tested by the manufacturer before any refund, to determine if the component is faulty or otherwise .
The item was collected and returned in a period of 26 days .

It does not feel right to me what's your view.

[Mojooo]

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 you can reject within 30 days if it
- not as described
- not fit for purpose
- not satisfactory quality

When using the 'short term right to reject' - the onus is on you to prove the fault existed.

Now the CRA says you can treat the contract and rejected and ended but that doesn't mean much unless the seller agrees

So they are entitled to examine the item and confirm it is not as described etc.

There is a seperate set of rights, where in the first 6 months the onus is on the seller to prove the item WAS as described etc at time of sale. The remedies under this are first repair or replacement and if neither possible a partial or full refund depending on what is apropriate.

[BertBert]

cliffords said:

I purchased in person and collected in person a component from a component supplier .
I fitted the item and it did not function correctly . I returned the item personally to be told that no refund would be given as they insisted it would be tested by the manufacturer before any refund, to determine if the component is faulty or otherwise .
The item was collected and returned in a period of 26 days .

It does not feel right to me what's your view.

Presumably they are not saying no refund, they are saying no refund until we have confirmed it as faulty as determined by the manufacturer testing it. I assume that the component is such that it can't be shown as faulty without the things it is a component of?

[cliffords]

Thank you for the quick and clear reply .

Given you state they have the right to inspect and confirm not as described etc , they did inspect when I returned it today, however they then ask the manufacturer to do this on their behalf,this is what they have done . I purchased it from the retailer not the manufacturer . I don't have a good feeling about the outcome.
The manufacturer will have to confirm their product is faulty, before the seller will consider a refund. I am old enough to see where this goes . I take it that there is no trading standards breach here , denying a refund for a faulty item within 30 days?

Thank you again.

[mcpoot]

Clock stops when you returned and rejected the item at 26 days so they cant come back after the manufacturer has checked it and say you are now over 30 days.

I presume there is no way the seller can confirm the component is faulty.

[cliffords]

BertBert said:

cliffords said:

I purchased in person and collected in person a component from a component supplier .
I fitted the item and it did not function correctly . I returned the item personally to be told that no refund would be given as they insisted it would be tested by the manufacturer before any refund, to determine if the component is faulty or otherwise .
The item was collected and returned in a period of 26 days .

It does not feel right to me what's your view.

Presumably they are not saying no refund, they are saying no refund until we have confirmed it as faulty as determined by the manufacturer testing it. I assume that the component is such that it can't be shown as faulty without the things it is a component of?

They are saying no refund, unless it is determined faulty by the manufacturer .

It's an item a competent engineer or the manufacturer can test in isolation

[Simpo Two]

cliffords said:

They are saying no refund, unless it is determined faulty by the manufacturer .

So they'll pay return postage to China? It's cobblers.

[cliffords]

Simpo Two said:

cliffords said:

They are saying no refund, unless it is determined faulty by the manufacturer .

So they'll pay return postage to China? It's cobblers.

The item is manufactured in the UK

[Simpo Two]

cliffords said:

The item is manufactured in the UK

Surprising, but it's still irrelevant - he's playing with you. Your contract is with him.

[OutInTheShed]

Not knowing what the 'component' is, it might be possible there is nothing wrong with the 'component' but it didn't function in the OP's 'system' because of a fault with the system or incorrect selection of 'component'.

Some 'components' in my world cost buttons but would take many hours and expensive gear to test against their spec.


I think this is why some businesses try hard not to supply 'components' to the general public.

It may also be possible the OP has damaged the component.
Not knowing whether the 'component' is a bolt of a microprocessor or.... it's hard to be clear about the matter.

[cliffords]

Yes. I have kept it vague deliberately, whilst I consider next steps and any outcomes. It's a fairly mundane item most on here would be familiar with.
I might post an outcome in a week or so .

[Sebring440]

cliffords said:

I might post an outcome in a week or so .

That's very good of you.

[cliffords]

Just to close this off . I did receive a refund.
I was not expecting them to agree the item was faulty,and it took a long time . However they did refund.
I won't use the supplier again, the service provided and their behaviour was poor.
But I did say I would update the outcome.

[Simpo Two]

Good news. They'll probably sell it to someone else who doesn't have the back-up of PH!

[Tye Green]

So what was the thing that failed ffs

[BertBert]

cliffords said:

Just to close this off . I did receive a refund.
I was not expecting them to agree the item was faulty,and it took a long time . However they did refund.
I won't use the supplier again, the service provided and their behaviour was poor.
But I did say I would update the outcome.

I'm glad it worked out with the refund. I'm not sure now poor the service was.

I seems reasonable that they'd want to check that the component was actually faulty, otherwise they could well be stuck with a used component that's not faulty. It's probably in the terms of the manufacturer.

Other than taking longer than you wanted, it's not that poor. What was poor about their behaviour by the way?

[GasEngineer]

Tye Green said:

So what was the thing that failed ffs

..are you going to tell us OP?

[mmm-five]

GasEngineer said:

..are you going to tell us OP?

I think it was something embarrassing, like a bluetooth cock-ring or butt-plug!

[Super Sonic]

mmm-five said:

I think it was something embarrassing, like a bluetooth cock-ring or butt-plug!

That would explain why it needs to be installed to be tested.