Rejecting DFS sofa
Discussion
Soovy said:
DaGuv said:
Update - The sofa now has a general defect, basicaly there is an issue with the leather on one of the cushions where it seems that the leather is alot softer than the rest of the sofa and is wearing really fast even though its a only a week old. Also numerous marks still remain. From looking at the net it seemed that my best course of action was to formally reject the sofa in writing qouting the sales of goods act. I sent this to my local dfs store last thursday. I have made several phone calls to my local store to get their response. Today I got a snotty call from the dept manager saying that because I qouted the sales of goods act in the letter, it has now been passed to the DFS legal team. The manager seemed very cocky, all the other staff I have spoke to were very polite. He said that I should exspect a letter from the legal team by the end of the week. I no I am gonna be drawn into a fight but surely the law is on my side as i have recived shoddy goods and I have rejected it in a resonable time and I will stop using the sofa.
You bought a cheap sofa from a crap retailer, on credit.You're acting as if you bought a £20k sofa from Harrods.
What would you do in this situation? Live with it or reject it?
Rags said:
Soovy said:
DaGuv said:
Update - The sofa now has a general defect, basicaly there is an issue with the leather on one of the cushions where it seems that the leather is alot softer than the rest of the sofa and is wearing really fast even though its a only a week old. Also numerous marks still remain. From looking at the net it seemed that my best course of action was to formally reject the sofa in writing qouting the sales of goods act. I sent this to my local dfs store last thursday. I have made several phone calls to my local store to get their response. Today I got a snotty call from the dept manager saying that because I qouted the sales of goods act in the letter, it has now been passed to the DFS legal team. The manager seemed very cocky, all the other staff I have spoke to were very polite. He said that I should exspect a letter from the legal team by the end of the week. I no I am gonna be drawn into a fight but surely the law is on my side as i have recived shoddy goods and I have rejected it in a resonable time and I will stop using the sofa.
You bought a cheap sofa from a crap retailer, on credit.You're acting as if you bought a £20k sofa from Harrods.
What would you do in this situation? Live with it or reject it?
If they fixed the defects then I'd live with it.
They have the right to fix problems. You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
Frankeh said:
Soovy said:
You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
I'd say exactly that if I got a car with a scratch on it. Be it from a Kia dealership or a Lamborghini dealership.
If you bought a car with a scratch on the door, you'd demand a whole new car instead of a repaired door?
If so, you'd have more chance of getting excrement out of a rocking horse. And quite rightly so.
Frankeh said:
Soovy said:
You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
I'd say exactly that if I got a car with a scratch on it. Be it from a Kia dealership or a Lamborghini dealership.
For balance...i bought a DFS sofa as it looked good, fitted the budget, was comfy and not so expensive i'd worry about 4 kids jumping on it.
After delivery i spotted a tear (the next day) which i blamed on them so they fix to 100% as new within a week (turned out the dog had slept on it!!! ) anyway, yr later the leather started to crack on one of the seats...within a week they had re-covered that seat and two others...100% as new.
Few yrs on and it will go in the skip when i fancy a change...till then it (and DFS) have been perfect.
OP sounds like SEVER buyers Remorse
After delivery i spotted a tear (the next day) which i blamed on them so they fix to 100% as new within a week (turned out the dog had slept on it!!! ) anyway, yr later the leather started to crack on one of the seats...within a week they had re-covered that seat and two others...100% as new.
Few yrs on and it will go in the skip when i fancy a change...till then it (and DFS) have been perfect.
OP sounds like SEVER buyers Remorse
Soovy said:
Rags said:
Soovy said:
DaGuv said:
Update - The sofa now has a general defect, basicaly there is an issue with the leather on one of the cushions where it seems that the leather is alot softer than the rest of the sofa and is wearing really fast even though its a only a week old. Also numerous marks still remain. From looking at the net it seemed that my best course of action was to formally reject the sofa in writing qouting the sales of goods act. I sent this to my local dfs store last thursday. I have made several phone calls to my local store to get their response. Today I got a snotty call from the dept manager saying that because I qouted the sales of goods act in the letter, it has now been passed to the DFS legal team. The manager seemed very cocky, all the other staff I have spoke to were very polite. He said that I should exspect a letter from the legal team by the end of the week. I no I am gonna be drawn into a fight but surely the law is on my side as i have recived shoddy goods and I have rejected it in a resonable time and I will stop using the sofa.
You bought a cheap sofa from a crap retailer, on credit.You're acting as if you bought a £20k sofa from Harrods.
What would you do in this situation? Live with it or reject it?
If they fixed the defects then I'd live with it.
They have the right to fix problems. You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
The Sofa is defective, and the OP is rejecting it. It matters not one jot whether he paid 500 or 5000.
hornetrider said:
Soovy said:
Rags said:
Soovy said:
DaGuv said:
Update - The sofa now has a general defect, basicaly there is an issue with the leather on one of the cushions where it seems that the leather is alot softer than the rest of the sofa and is wearing really fast even though its a only a week old. Also numerous marks still remain. From looking at the net it seemed that my best course of action was to formally reject the sofa in writing qouting the sales of goods act. I sent this to my local dfs store last thursday. I have made several phone calls to my local store to get their response. Today I got a snotty call from the dept manager saying that because I qouted the sales of goods act in the letter, it has now been passed to the DFS legal team. The manager seemed very cocky, all the other staff I have spoke to were very polite. He said that I should exspect a letter from the legal team by the end of the week. I no I am gonna be drawn into a fight but surely the law is on my side as i have recived shoddy goods and I have rejected it in a resonable time and I will stop using the sofa.
You bought a cheap sofa from a crap retailer, on credit.You're acting as if you bought a £20k sofa from Harrods.
What would you do in this situation? Live with it or reject it?
If they fixed the defects then I'd live with it.
They have the right to fix problems. You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
The Sofa is defective, and the OP is rejecting it. It matters not one jot whether he paid 500 or 5000.
You can no-more reject a sofa for a single fault as you can reject a brand new television because the remote control doesn't work or a new fridge because the light doesn't work.
The manufacturer has to be given the right to make your product good. Can you imagine the expense and wastage in replacement items otherwise?
One shouldn't accept faulty goods. But one should also be realistic about the vendor correcting those faulty goods.
Plus, I get the impression the OP is after his money back because he's realised how s
t DFS is and not a new sofa because his is busted....Before people go clattering on about how he's got a right to a new one yada yada, they ought to look at the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) and find out exactly what his rights are. I quoted iton page one but clearly the clatterers didn't bother to read it.
They have fixed it, he has accepted the repair. End of. DFS have done all that is required of them by law. Anything else is a bonus depending on their goodwill.
The fact he 'doesn't like it' is neither here not there; it's not DFS's fault that he bought something he didn't like!
They have fixed it, he has accepted the repair. End of. DFS have done all that is required of them by law. Anything else is a bonus depending on their goodwill.
The fact he 'doesn't like it' is neither here not there; it's not DFS's fault that he bought something he didn't like!
Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 3rd February 17:25
hornetrider said:
Soovy said:
Rags said:
Soovy said:
DaGuv said:
Update - The sofa now has a general defect, basicaly there is an issue with the leather on one of the cushions where it seems that the leather is alot softer than the rest of the sofa and is wearing really fast even though its a only a week old. Also numerous marks still remain. From looking at the net it seemed that my best course of action was to formally reject the sofa in writing qouting the sales of goods act. I sent this to my local dfs store last thursday. I have made several phone calls to my local store to get their response. Today I got a snotty call from the dept manager saying that because I qouted the sales of goods act in the letter, it has now been passed to the DFS legal team. The manager seemed very cocky, all the other staff I have spoke to were very polite. He said that I should exspect a letter from the legal team by the end of the week. I no I am gonna be drawn into a fight but surely the law is on my side as i have recived shoddy goods and I have rejected it in a resonable time and I will stop using the sofa.
You bought a cheap sofa from a crap retailer, on credit.You're acting as if you bought a £20k sofa from Harrods.
What would you do in this situation? Live with it or reject it?
If they fixed the defects then I'd live with it.
They have the right to fix problems. You can't just say "oh it's got a mark on it and I don't like it and I want a new one".
The Sofa is defective, and the OP is rejecting it. It matters not one jot whether he paid 500 or 5000.
Surely the 'right to fix problems' has to be to the customer's satisfaction?
You have the right to regect a car if you are not satisfied, are you not?
Just because an item is cheap does not give the seller the right to make you accept any old crap.
It's a game of brinkmanship with these people. How much are you willing to kick up (provided your complaint is fair & reasonable). After all, the sofa the OP saw and based his order on in the showroom wasn't scuffed.
oh and yes, cock.
You have the right to regect a car if you are not satisfied, are you not?
Just because an item is cheap does not give the seller the right to make you accept any old crap.
It's a game of brinkmanship with these people. How much are you willing to kick up (provided your complaint is fair & reasonable). After all, the sofa the OP saw and based his order on in the showroom wasn't scuffed.
oh and yes, cock.
I sometimes get the impression that people just automatically agree with 'pillars' of the PH community.........regardless of how narrow their views may be on occasions!
I totally disagree with you Vesuvious - If an item is bought and its faulty or imperfect, surely the consumer has his rights.
What is perhaps muddying the waters is the lead time for a sofa if a replacement is wanted but surely these sofas are not bespoke.
In terms of it being dead stock for the store, this may be true hence why they are resisting taking it back but I am sure some punter would buy it if it was put back into a DFS to avoid a stupidly long wait.
This next comment is not helpful but purchasing a good quality sofa in the first instance may have not caused this hiccup.
I totally disagree with you Vesuvious - If an item is bought and its faulty or imperfect, surely the consumer has his rights.
What is perhaps muddying the waters is the lead time for a sofa if a replacement is wanted but surely these sofas are not bespoke.
In terms of it being dead stock for the store, this may be true hence why they are resisting taking it back but I am sure some punter would buy it if it was put back into a DFS to avoid a stupidly long wait.
This next comment is not helpful but purchasing a good quality sofa in the first instance may have not caused this hiccup.
pacman1 said:
Surely the 'right to fix problems' has to be to the customer's satisfaction?
It was. He signed it off, witness:DaGuv said:
a guy from dfs came out today and said the marks were from been delivered and knocked against the wall. I tend to agree with this. He was very polite etc. He went out to his van and got a kit and it is now looking fine.
Had he said 'This repair is rubbish and I do not accept it', that would be a different matter, but he did accept it. Furthermore the OP himself says there is not a genuine reason for sending it back:DaGuv said:
how can I reject it and get my money back without a genuine reason???
Simpo Two said:
pacman1 said:
Surely the 'right to fix problems' has to be to the customer's satisfaction?
It was. He signed it off, witness:DaGuv said:
a guy from dfs came out today and said the marks were from been delivered and knocked against the wall. I tend to agree with this. He was very polite etc. He went out to his van and got a kit and it is now looking fine.
Had he said 'This repair is rubbish and I do not accept it', that would be a different matter, but he did accept it. Furthermore the OP himself says there is not a genuine reason for sending it back:DaGuv said:
how can I reject it and get my money back without a genuine reason???
I think he has a fair and valid reason. even if he doesn't. A bit of pressure from his missus there for him to sort it too!
Where is the limit then? If the entire sofa was one big scuff mark that could be polished out, would that be OK to accept? Whether it's been signed for or not, if he still ain't happy with subsequent damage found, does he not have the right, on balance, to reject the product, as with a car from a dealer? Will he be forever phoning DFS to come and repolish and rectify their 'mends'?
OP, if you genuinely not happy, get yourself off to Citizens Advice and see how you stand legally.
Edited by pacman1 on Wednesday 3rd February 23:15
It's truly heartwarming to be referred to as both a cock and a pillar of the PH community in one thread.
Thanks.
In this case, our hero bought a sofa. It has a fault. The fault was corrected and he agreed it had been.
He does have rights. He has the right to have minor defects rectified.
He does not have the right to spit his dummy and send it back because it has a few small marks on it!
pacman1 said:
Where is the limit then? If the entire sofa was one big scuff mark that could be polished out, would that be OK to accept? Whether it's been signed for or not, if he still ain't happy with subsequent damage found, does he not have the right, on balance, to reject the product, as with a car from a dealer? Will he be forever phoning DFS to come and repolish and rectify their 'mends'?
This car analogy is becoming grating....If you buy a new car and it has damage, you can reject it. However you cannot request a new car and send back the original one. The dealer has to be given the opportunity to repair the car to new specification.
To reject the car and get a new one, the car would have to have a catalogue of faults that you could prove are fundamentally related to it's poor construction.
This is nothing to do with the cost of the vehicle. The same would apply to a Bentley or to a Kia.
The same principle applies with furniture (or any other relatively high value item)
If you buy a sofa from Harrods and there's a fault, first course of action for them would also robably be to try and repair it. You don't take back a £10k sofa without trying to fix it.
However, a lot of Harrods customers wouldn't accept this and would want a new one. Harrods, being an upmarket store, would probably want to keep the customer happy and their reputation intact and would probably either agree and replace or cut a deal. BUT this is a commercial decision by Harrods - they are under no legal obligation to do this.
DFS are not seeking that repeat business or that level of customer service. They know that to keep their margins they can't go round replacing their low-cost sofas with new ones every time there's a fault (which would be a lot)
Therefore they fulfil their minimum obligation, which is to make the item good.
IF the product has a catalogue of faults and is therefore shown to be of totally sub-standard quality and/or construction, you would have a good case to reject the whole item as you could prove that it's fundamentally flawed. DFS are then obliged to replace the item with an equivalent.
BUT, a scratch on delivery and some marked leather does not qualify as fundamentally flawed, so the OP has to live with it.
So, in conclusion - a couple of problems means lots of visits from DFS repair people. Consistent faults mean a chance of replacement.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff