Returns to an Amazon seller

[mfmman]

Hoping for a bit of advice please

I bought a new Xbox one controller for my son in late October, a week ago one of the buttons stopped working

I contacted the seller who claimed he had no obligation to repair or replace since the 30 day returns period had elapsed. He suggested I take it up with Microsoft. I replied I believed the Consumer Rights act would apply and my complaint was with the retailer, to which they replied I had stated the item was working on delivery (correct) that meant they had proved the fault was not present at the time of sale and so the act was not relevant (Citizen Advice say 'fault' can mean something not being of adequate quality to last a reasonable period).

I escalated to Amazon, who have rejected my claim due again due to the same 30 day returns policy, but although I raised it via the live chat, due to the feedback I don't think they actually have looked at the previous detail correctly.

Its a 40 quid item so I won't be chasing it too hard but it could have been 140, 240 or whatever

Would the retailer and Amazon be correct in their assertions?

[Ed.]

Could try calling Amazon or getting them to call you back, I have found the customer service better when you can talk to then.
Could try talking it up with Microsoft, you have proof of purchase.

I am not sure about the 30 day rule, I bought a replacement battery for a drill from a 3rd party seller. Found it was faulty 4 months later and emailed them through Amazon. After 2 emails with no response I reported it to Amazon and they refunded me, I did notice the seller was no longer active.

[mfmman]

Just done the live chat thing again, Amazon have told me to take it up with the seller and if that fails to try a credit card charge back

I'm surprised how poor this is, I bought an new Wii game from Amazon themselves previously and when it arrived it was a second hand previous edition of the game in the ordered game box, Replaced with no question straight away when that would have been something I would expected them to refuse (as it could easily have been me trying it on)

I feel eBay/Paypal would have refunded no problem

[hotchy]

Buy a new one, send old back as faulty? Yes bad but what other option have they left you.

[21TonyK]

hotchy said:

Buy a new one, send old back as faulty? Yes bad but what other option have they left you.

We had to do something similar TWICE with Microsoft xbox headsets.

[All that jazz]

mfmman said:

I'm surprised how poor this is

Why is it "poor"? Put yourself in the seller's position. He will get several of these 'faulty item' claims to deal with every week, most of which will be dishonest people trying it on because if you know how the DSR rules work you can exploit them to your advantage and even if you don't it costs nothing to try it on. You've bought a controller and now 2-3 months later it's allegedly broken and you want a refund or replacement. The seller from bitter experience is immediately going to think "yeah right" and check to see when you bought it and then once he's discovered it's outside scope of his obligations that's when you receive the "sorry no can do" email. If you were the seller you'd do exactly the same thing, guaranteed. Even if he did decide to go against his better judgement, what's to say that the controller hasn't been abused for those 2 months? It is a game controller after all, well known for being launched across the room in anger when you lose. Unless the seller offered a warranty with the controller on his ad then from a legal perspective there's nothing you can do and you'll have to suck it up. I agree it's the stty end of the stick if the controller has broken so soon without any abuse but that's life.

[Chrisgr31]

All that jazz said:

Unless the seller offered a warranty with the controller on his ad then from a legal perspective there's nothing you can do and you'll have to suck it up. I agree it's the stty end of the stick if the controller has broken so soon without any abuse but that's life.

Well he can use his statutory rights to return the item and on inspection it should be possible for the seller to determine it has not been abused. Yes the seller might have to put up with those who are dishonest trying to get refunds they are not entitled to however the hassle should be built in to their pricing policy,

[All that jazz]

Chrisgr31 said:

Well he can use his statutory rights to return the item and on inspection it should be possible for the seller to determine it has not been abused. Yes the seller might have to put up with those who are dishonest trying to get refunds they are not entitled to however the hassle should be built in to their pricing policy,

What "statutory rights" are these you speak of in the circumstances outlined?

[bladebloke]

All that jazz said:

What "statutory rights" are these you speak of in the circumstances outlined?

The rights he speaks of are the ones stemming from the condition implied into the contract by the Consumer Rights Act that all goods sold in the course of business must be of satisfactory quality.

Something that fails for no good reason after this amount of time is clearly not satisfactory quality and although the period for the short term right to reject has passed, that does not mean that the OP has no remedy - he can now rely on the presumption that arises in the first 6 months from sale that the defect that has now made itself apparent was present at the time of sale, and only if the seller could prove that wasn't the case would he be absolved of his responsibilities.

The seller is in breach of contract, and OP, you have the remedies that the act provides. I'm sure you will find a guide to what those are easily enough online. I'd read up on that and then suggest that the easier thing for everybody would be for the seller to replace, rather than repair.

Edited by bladebloke on Saturday 24th December 09:14

[bladebloke]

All that jazz said:

Unless the seller offered a warranty with the controller on his ad then from a legal perspective there's nothing you can do and you'll have to suck it up.

From a legal perspective, that's entirely incorrect. As long as you're within 6 years of the sale there is a legal remedy, potentially (in a technical sense, of course - as more time passes it becomes less likely that a failure would render the goods of unsatisfactory quality). In the first 6 months it should be easy for the consumer though - that's what the presumption in the legislation mentioned in my previous post is designed to achieve.

[All that jazz]

bladebloke said:

The rights he speaks of are the ones stemming from the condition implied into the contract by the Consumer Rights Act that all goods sold in the course of business must be of satisfactory quality.

Something that fails for no good reason after this amount of time is almost clearly not satisfactory quality and although the period for the short term right to reject has passed, that does not mean that the OP has no remedy - he can now rely on the presumption that arises in the first 6 months from sale that the defect that has now made itself apparent was present at the time of sale, and only if the seller could prove that wasn't the case would he be absolved of his responsibilities.

The seller is in breach of contract, and OP, you have the remedies that the act provides. I'm sure you will find a guide to what those are easily enough online. I'd read up on that and then suggest that the easier thing for everybody would be for the seller to replace, rather than repair.

The chances of any of that happening are 0. His response from Amazon (who know the rules inside out) is the end of it. I highly doubt he'll get anywhere with a chargeback either and if he does succeed Amazon will simply terminate his account and block him from opening a fresh one which they have a documented history of doing in these cases.

[All that jazz]

bladebloke said:

All that jazz said:

Unless the seller offered a warranty with the controller on his ad then from a legal perspective there's nothing you can do and you'll have to suck it up.

From a legal perspective, that's entirely incorrect. As long as you're within 6 years of the sale there is a legal remedy, potentially (in a technical sense, of course - as more time passes it becomes less likely that a failure would render the goods of unsatisfactory quality). In the first 6 months it should be easy for the consumer though - that's what the presumption in the legislation mentioned in my previous post is designed to achieve.

Well crack on then. Good luck arguing the case with Amazon and still being able to shop on Amazon at the end of it.

[james7]

No advice to offer im afraid.
If you bought it on a credit card through the marketplace then the credit card company may not be able to do a chargeback, or indeed anything to help as the payment does not go through the seller.

I went through this with a faulty item and, unknown to me at the time, the seller was in the us so I could not do anything to persue them that way. Amazon were most unhelpful to say the least.

My lesson from this is dont use amazon/amazon marketplace to buy anything.

[bladebloke]

All that jazz said:

Well crack on then. Good luck arguing the case with Amazon and still being able to shop on Amazon at the end of it.

He's not arguing with Amazon, he's arguing through Amazon. And in any case, I tend to find that big retailers are quite keen to protect their reputations and give customers the confidence to come back again in future.

You're posts sound like the OP is trying it on. Assuming the facts are as they say, he has been supplied a faulty product and is legally, and morally, entitled to a remedy.

And I'm guessing from your tone that you took issue with mine. The only reason for that was that I think if you're going to post on a legal sub forum about things "from a legal perspective", you should probably know what the relevant law is.

[All that jazz]

bladebloke said:

All that jazz said:

Well crack on then. Good luck arguing the case with Amazon and still being able to shop on Amazon at the end of it.

He's not arguing with Amazon, he's arguing through Amazon. And in any case, I tend to find that big retailers are quite keen to protect their reputations and give customers the confidence to come back again in future.

Agreed, but Amazon have already told him to do one. They won't go back on that decision.

baldbloke said:

You're posts sound like the OP is trying it on. Assuming the facts are as they say, he has been supplied a faulty product and is legally, and morally, entitled to a remedy.

Not at all. I sympathise with the OPs predicament to some degree as I know I'd be pissed off if the same had happened to me, but in my experience the controllers are very robust and so I wonder if perhaps we're not being furnished with the full story here (as is traditional on most "advice" threads on PH).

baldbloke said:

And I'm guessing from your tone that you took issue with mine. The only reason for that was that I think if you're going to post on a legal sub forum about things "from a legal perspective", you should probably know what the relevant law is.

Again not at all. It is a fair point having refreshed myself with the law this morning and I stand corrected. But law on his side or not, I still don't think this is going to end well for him if he persues it. Depends how much he values his Amazon account as they waste no time in deleting accounts if you try to force their hand by going legal or doing a charge back.

[mfmman]

Firstly, everything I have posted is correct, so 'All that Jazz', you taking that type of approach might be valid in some threads but not this one thanks.

The controller is 7 weeks old, a quick inspection shows no dents, damage or other signs of abuse. It has not been thrown about in a tantrum. The two other controllers we have that are OEM are two years and twenty months old respectively and are in good working order, this should give some idea of the way they are used. We also have an aftermarket one that is about a year old that works fine as well. This new one was only purchased as my son bought a replacement microsoft headset and it would not work unless used with an original controller.

How much do I value my Amazon account, not that much really. I buy perhaps half a dozen things per year. Whether I will go any further I am not sure. My next likely step will be to contact Microsoft and see if they may do something for me.

If I do go down the charge back route, I faithfully promise to update the thread especially if Amazon don't close my account. Worth noting in my second post that Amazon advised me to try a chargeback, an odd action for a company who alledgedly acts so strongly when people do.

[Digitalize]

It's a Microsoft product so they'll warranty it.

General rule of thumb is always buy direct from Amazon, aftercare is much better.

[mfmman]

Digitalize said:

It's a Microsoft product so they'll warranty it.

Hope so

Digitalize said:

General rule of thumb is always buy direct from Amazon, aftercare is much better.

I agree, see my post above about the incorrect game supplied, couldn't have sounded scammier but resolved with no issue at all

[All that jazz]

mfmman said:

If I do go down the charge back route, I faithfully promise to update the thread especially if Amazon don't close my account. Worth noting in my second post that Amazon advised me to try a chargeback, an odd action for a company who alledgedly acts so strongly when people do.

So it wasn't sold by Amazon then, it was sold by an Amazon Marketplace vendor. If it was sold by Amazon I can guarantee you that they would not have suggested you do a charge back . Basically Amazon don't care because as far as they're concerned it's not their money nor reputation (to lesser extent) that's at stake and also because it's out of scope of their 30 day return policy.

Did you pay for it with a credit card?

[dacouch]

It's the Consumer Rights Act and if a fault is found with the item within the first six months it's presumed to have been there since purchase unless the retailer can prove otherwise

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/...