Pay for inspection of faulty goods
Discussion
This is the second time I've started a CRA (2015) thread on here in less than 6 months... I'm not having a lot of luck with dodgy electronics at the mo 
Is there any provision in the Consumer Rights Act for a retailer to insist a Customer pays for inspection of an item prior to repair, when the item is out of warranty BUT the repair is required because the item has a design defect?
My situation, in summary:
2 years ago I bought a major-brand laptop through a well-known national electronics retailer, with a 1 year RTB warranty. About £1k, so middle-of-the-road.
The laptop has served only light duties at home (it's not my work computer, it's not even my primary personal computer and it has never known the sting of an irate teenager punching it out of frustration when Fortnight glitches).
When closing the screen one day, it felt "wrong". Carefully opening it again, the bezel had come unclipped to reveal the metal chassis had snapped due to metal fatigue where it meets the hinge, and the chassis on the opposite side was starting to show signs of metal fatigue. I'm not a mechanical engineer but the chassis elements look under-sized considering the forces at that location, despite the bezel being chunky enough to hide a much larger chassis (it was bought for functionality, not looks!)
Other laptops of this make and model have also suffered this fault. (I realise this is not a slam-dunk; it's a major brand, they will have sold lots and some will end up broken).
Since then I have had 2 months of back-and-forth with the retailer including photographs and links to other users experiencing this. The retailer is sticking to their guns that I must pay a fee for them to inspect my laptop before they will agree (or disagree) that this is a design or manufacturing defect.
I'm sticking to my guns that I have a contract with them under CRA 2015, and that there is no justification to pay them additional money to uphold their end of the contract. Indeed, me agreeing to pay an inspection fee would be entering an entirely new contract, which is unnecessary. I'm perfectly happy to take it to one of their shops, but only on the proviso they're not going to charge me a fee.
Net result: stalemate, but I think the law is on my side.
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
So, is anyone here wise enough to know if and how a retailer is allowed to request a fee to inspect an item that is being submitted for inspection (and repair) under the auspices of a CRA claim?
(I fully appreciate the time of their employees isn't free to the retailer, that's not the question)
Is there any provision in the Consumer Rights Act for a retailer to insist a Customer pays for inspection of an item prior to repair, when the item is out of warranty BUT the repair is required because the item has a design defect?
My situation, in summary:
2 years ago I bought a major-brand laptop through a well-known national electronics retailer, with a 1 year RTB warranty. About £1k, so middle-of-the-road.
The laptop has served only light duties at home (it's not my work computer, it's not even my primary personal computer and it has never known the sting of an irate teenager punching it out of frustration when Fortnight glitches).
When closing the screen one day, it felt "wrong". Carefully opening it again, the bezel had come unclipped to reveal the metal chassis had snapped due to metal fatigue where it meets the hinge, and the chassis on the opposite side was starting to show signs of metal fatigue. I'm not a mechanical engineer but the chassis elements look under-sized considering the forces at that location, despite the bezel being chunky enough to hide a much larger chassis (it was bought for functionality, not looks!)
Other laptops of this make and model have also suffered this fault. (I realise this is not a slam-dunk; it's a major brand, they will have sold lots and some will end up broken).
Since then I have had 2 months of back-and-forth with the retailer including photographs and links to other users experiencing this. The retailer is sticking to their guns that I must pay a fee for them to inspect my laptop before they will agree (or disagree) that this is a design or manufacturing defect.
I'm sticking to my guns that I have a contract with them under CRA 2015, and that there is no justification to pay them additional money to uphold their end of the contract. Indeed, me agreeing to pay an inspection fee would be entering an entirely new contract, which is unnecessary. I'm perfectly happy to take it to one of their shops, but only on the proviso they're not going to charge me a fee.
Net result: stalemate, but I think the law is on my side.
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
So, is anyone here wise enough to know if and how a retailer is allowed to request a fee to inspect an item that is being submitted for inspection (and repair) under the auspices of a CRA claim?
(I fully appreciate the time of their employees isn't free to the retailer, that's not the question)
donkmeister said:
This is the second time I've started a CRA (2015) thread on here in less than 6 months... I'm not having a lot of luck with dodgy electronics at the mo
Is there any provision in the Consumer Rights Act for a retailer to insist a Customer pays for inspection of an item prior to repair, when the item is out of warranty BUT the repair is required because the item has a design defect?
My situation, in summary:
2 years ago I bought a major-brand laptop through a well-known national electronics retailer, with a 1 year RTB warranty. About £1k, so middle-of-the-road.
The laptop has served only light duties at home (it's not my work computer, it's not even my primary personal computer and it has never known the sting of an irate teenager punching it out of frustration when Fortnight glitches).
When closing the screen one day, it felt "wrong". Carefully opening it again, the bezel had come unclipped to reveal the metal chassis had snapped due to metal fatigue where it meets the hinge, and the chassis on the opposite side was starting to show signs of metal fatigue. I'm not a mechanical engineer but the chassis elements look under-sized considering the forces at that location, despite the bezel being chunky enough to hide a much larger chassis (it was bought for functionality, not looks!)
Other laptops of this make and model have also suffered this fault. (I realise this is not a slam-dunk; it's a major brand, they will have sold lots and some will end up broken).
Since then I have had 2 months of back-and-forth with the retailer including photographs and links to other users experiencing this. The retailer is sticking to their guns that I must pay a fee for them to inspect my laptop before they will agree (or disagree) that this is a design or manufacturing defect.
I'm sticking to my guns that I have a contract with them under CRA 2015, and that there is no justification to pay them additional money to uphold their end of the contract. Indeed, me agreeing to pay an inspection fee would be entering an entirely new contract, which is unnecessary. I'm perfectly happy to take it to one of their shops, but only on the proviso they're not going to charge me a fee.
Net result: stalemate, but I think the law is on my side.
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
So, is anyone here wise enough to know if and how a retailer is allowed to request a fee to inspect an item that is being submitted for inspection (and repair) under the auspices of a CRA claim?
(I fully appreciate the time of their employees isn't free to the retailer, that's not the question)
Is this not same as garages charging for investigations to determine if a fault is covered by a warranty? Not sure if the retailer is competent enough to review someone else's design for adequacy though.Is there any provision in the Consumer Rights Act for a retailer to insist a Customer pays for inspection of an item prior to repair, when the item is out of warranty BUT the repair is required because the item has a design defect?
My situation, in summary:
2 years ago I bought a major-brand laptop through a well-known national electronics retailer, with a 1 year RTB warranty. About £1k, so middle-of-the-road.
The laptop has served only light duties at home (it's not my work computer, it's not even my primary personal computer and it has never known the sting of an irate teenager punching it out of frustration when Fortnight glitches).
When closing the screen one day, it felt "wrong". Carefully opening it again, the bezel had come unclipped to reveal the metal chassis had snapped due to metal fatigue where it meets the hinge, and the chassis on the opposite side was starting to show signs of metal fatigue. I'm not a mechanical engineer but the chassis elements look under-sized considering the forces at that location, despite the bezel being chunky enough to hide a much larger chassis (it was bought for functionality, not looks!)
Other laptops of this make and model have also suffered this fault. (I realise this is not a slam-dunk; it's a major brand, they will have sold lots and some will end up broken).
Since then I have had 2 months of back-and-forth with the retailer including photographs and links to other users experiencing this. The retailer is sticking to their guns that I must pay a fee for them to inspect my laptop before they will agree (or disagree) that this is a design or manufacturing defect.
I'm sticking to my guns that I have a contract with them under CRA 2015, and that there is no justification to pay them additional money to uphold their end of the contract. Indeed, me agreeing to pay an inspection fee would be entering an entirely new contract, which is unnecessary. I'm perfectly happy to take it to one of their shops, but only on the proviso they're not going to charge me a fee.
Net result: stalemate, but I think the law is on my side.
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
So, is anyone here wise enough to know if and how a retailer is allowed to request a fee to inspect an item that is being submitted for inspection (and repair) under the auspices of a CRA claim?
(I fully appreciate the time of their employees isn't free to the retailer, that's not the question)
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 13th January 20:31
/cynical mode on/
I can save you the cost of an inspection and just let you know the results of their findings now if you like?
It's not a design fault. It's user error, most probably caused by incorrect method of closing the laptop meaning it has been broken by the user and therefore will not be covered by the warranty.
The quote of cost to repair or to replace will follow shortly.
HTH.
/cynical mode off/
I can save you the cost of an inspection and just let you know the results of their findings now if you like?
It's not a design fault. It's user error, most probably caused by incorrect method of closing the laptop meaning it has been broken by the user and therefore will not be covered by the warranty.
The quote of cost to repair or to replace will follow shortly.
HTH.
/cynical mode off/
donkmeister said:
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
They don't know it's defective. You allege it's defective. So there's a dispute. Ultimately the way to resolve it is sue them. As part of your evidence you'll have to provide a report from an expert. Guess who's paying for that?
Cold said:
/cynical mode on/
I can save you the cost of an inspection and just let you know the results of their findings now if you like?
It's not a design fault. It's user error, most probably caused by incorrect method of closing the laptop meaning it has been broken by the user and therefore will not be covered by the warranty.
The quote of cost to repair or to replace will follow shortly.
HTH.
/cynical mode off/
This is also in the back of my mind. I can save you the cost of an inspection and just let you know the results of their findings now if you like?
It's not a design fault. It's user error, most probably caused by incorrect method of closing the laptop meaning it has been broken by the user and therefore will not be covered by the warranty.
The quote of cost to repair or to replace will follow shortly.
HTH.
/cynical mode off/
Sheepshanks said:
donkmeister said:
Assuming that the customer services of a large national retailer wouldn't flout CRA 2015, I've checked CRA 2015 but I can't see anything saying a retailer can charge a fee to inspect, only that they cannot charge to repair if it's due to the item being defective. They are unwilling or unable to tell me how this aligns with CRA 2015 though.
They don't know it's defective. You allege it's defective. So there's a dispute. Ultimately the way to resolve it is sue them. As part of your evidence you'll have to provide a report from an expert. Guess who's paying for that?
I am pretty much resigned to small claims, but it's really just understanding if there is something I'm missing in the CRA about this - do you know?
1 year RTB warranty.
"2 years ago I bought".
The burden of proving the defect now falls to you.
The retailer does not need to do anything, you have the burden of proving it is defective.
The retailer has engaged with you and has offered to have the item examined at your cost. They don't even have to do that.
If you did a small claim it would be very likely (99%) that a judge would ask for an engineers report and after 2 years would very likely expect you to provide it at your cost.
"2 years ago I bought".
The burden of proving the defect now falls to you.
The retailer does not need to do anything, you have the burden of proving it is defective.
The retailer has engaged with you and has offered to have the item examined at your cost. They don't even have to do that.
If you did a small claim it would be very likely (99%) that a judge would ask for an engineers report and after 2 years would very likely expect you to provide it at your cost.
After 6 months the burden of proof is on you to show the goods are faulty - this is done by a report.
They don’t have to do the report, you can get it done elsewhere - but you’ll still have to pay.
Past 6 months the ball is in your court, so you’ll need to pay to have it assessed. They’re correct in what they’re saying.
They don’t have to do the report, you can get it done elsewhere - but you’ll still have to pay.
Past 6 months the ball is in your court, so you’ll need to pay to have it assessed. They’re correct in what they’re saying.
Thanks both.
I understand the viewpoint from a "what the retailer would like to happen" point of view, but what I'm struggling with here is that what you are suggesting doesn't seem to be supported by the legislation, and is a messy contractual position too (I enter contract B to try and get them to uphold their end of contract A. I just want them to uphold their end of contract A).
The law however... how does the law support their or my position? They can't tell me, does anyone know?
I understand the viewpoint from a "what the retailer would like to happen" point of view, but what I'm struggling with here is that what you are suggesting doesn't seem to be supported by the legislation, and is a messy contractual position too (I enter contract B to try and get them to uphold their end of contract A. I just want them to uphold their end of contract A).
The law however... how does the law support their or my position? They can't tell me, does anyone know?
OP I believe the law is that when a fault becomes apparent after 6 months then it's up to the consumer to prove it was present at sale (or inherent)
So they are to entitled to charge a fee, although of course giving it to them to inspect is akin to putting a fox in charge of a hen house and you would be better advised to organise an independent inspection if you believe that will support your claim
So they are to entitled to charge a fee, although of course giving it to them to inspect is akin to putting a fox in charge of a hen house and you would be better advised to organise an independent inspection if you believe that will support your claim
What laptop is it... I can't see any reason not to reveal the make and model but appreciate if there's some reason I've not thought of.
Reason I ask is that I've just been on eBay and looked for laptop hinges and the first 5 results are for pairs of hinges for various different laptops and all are less than a tenner for the set.
You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
Reason I ask is that I've just been on eBay and looked for laptop hinges and the first 5 results are for pairs of hinges for various different laptops and all are less than a tenner for the set.
You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
ingenieur said:
Reason I ask is that I've just been on eBay and looked for laptop hinges and the first 5 results are for pairs of hinges for various different laptops and all are less than a tenner for the set.
You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
You're not wrong - the hinges are indeed available on eBay for about £35 delivered. Not a huge expense but much less than the depreciation on a laptop.You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
Might rethink this!
donkmeister said:
ingenieur said:
Reason I ask is that I've just been on eBay and looked for laptop hinges and the first 5 results are for pairs of hinges for various different laptops and all are less than a tenner for the set.
You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
You're not wrong - the hinges are indeed available on eBay for about £35 delivered. Not a huge expense but much less than the depreciation on a laptop.You may be agonising greatly over a repair which could be done at your local laptop repair centre for not that much!
Might rethink this!
There is no provision in the CRA that says a retailer CAN charge.
If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
Mojooo said:
There is no provision in the CRA that says a retailer CAN charge.
If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
Ok, that I can understand.If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
Mojooo said:
There is no provision in the CRA that says a retailer CAN charge.
If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
By that wording I’m assuming that crucially there is no provision stating they cannot charge either? Especially since the onus in on the customer outside 6 months. If you cannot come to an agreement then start a small claim case and the onus will be on you to prove its defective - either by explaining it to the court and convincing the Judge or getting an independent report from someone who might be more knowledgeable/expert.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff