Faulty product, what are my rights?
Discussion
Basically does anyone have an understanding of what rights i have to a refund. I bought a projector october last year, and it has been back for repair twice, and is stil not right. The company i bought it from will only repair it again, replace it with an equivilant aged item, or a partial refund. I stated what partial refund amount i was looking for but they dont want to agree to that amount and want me to send it back to inspect it first, meaning they have my projector and money.
help!
thanks
help!
thanks
Should be quite simple.
Write to them stating that the projector isn't fit for purpose under the Sales of Goods Act.
State that you have given them 2 opportunities to rectify the situation, and they have failed to do so on both counts.
Request (dont demand... yet) that they either replace the unit with a brand new example free of charge (be prepared to pay postage etc) or they give you a full refund.
Give them 10 working days to respond with the answer, and give them an additional 5 working days to have the whole situation wrapped up.
No need to wade in with any threats yet - but if they start playing hard ball, then you can wheel out the court proceedings which should firmly wedge a firework up their rusty sheriff's badge
Let me know if you have any questions
Write to them stating that the projector isn't fit for purpose under the Sales of Goods Act.
State that you have given them 2 opportunities to rectify the situation, and they have failed to do so on both counts.
Request (dont demand... yet) that they either replace the unit with a brand new example free of charge (be prepared to pay postage etc) or they give you a full refund.
Give them 10 working days to respond with the answer, and give them an additional 5 working days to have the whole situation wrapped up.
No need to wade in with any threats yet - but if they start playing hard ball, then you can wheel out the court proceedings which should firmly wedge a firework up their rusty sheriff's badge
Let me know if you have any questions
Pah, rubbish.
It is their responsibility now. Rather than argue the toss over getting a new replacement or used replacement, I would push hard for a full refund.
Something like this should suffice:
Re: [product description]
Dear [Contact Person or Customer Service Manager],
On [date], I bought a [name of product with model number] at [location and other details of the transaction].
I am disappointed because your product has not performed as it should because [state the problem as you understand it giving as much detail as possible], as described under the Sales of Goods Act 1979. I have given your company two separate occasions to resolve the problem, and yet this has not been done.
To resolve the problem I would appreciate your co-operation in issuing me with a full and complete refund for [ammount]. Enclosed is a copy of the receipt.
I look forward to hearing from you and to a resolution of this problem. I will wait for 10 working days before seeking help from appropriate authorities. Please contact me at the above address or by phone [give numbers].
Yours sincerely
[Sign]
[Print Your Name]
It is their responsibility now. Rather than argue the toss over getting a new replacement or used replacement, I would push hard for a full refund.
Something like this should suffice:
Re: [product description]
Dear [Contact Person or Customer Service Manager],
On [date], I bought a [name of product with model number] at [location and other details of the transaction].
I am disappointed because your product has not performed as it should because [state the problem as you understand it giving as much detail as possible], as described under the Sales of Goods Act 1979. I have given your company two separate occasions to resolve the problem, and yet this has not been done.
To resolve the problem I would appreciate your co-operation in issuing me with a full and complete refund for [ammount]. Enclosed is a copy of the receipt.
I look forward to hearing from you and to a resolution of this problem. I will wait for 10 working days before seeking help from appropriate authorities. Please contact me at the above address or by phone [give numbers].
Yours sincerely
[Sign]
[Print Your Name]
Although that letter is good it should be pointed out that although the shop is not being hugely helpful, from what I can see here they are actually within the letter of the law.
When someone is within the law, spouting statute and authorities to them only makes them think 'F**k you too' and respond in kind with the minimum possible.
Instead of going down that route another option may be to renegotiate a refund amount based upon the fact that you will be buying a different model from them and not someone else. This will most likely provide more scope for goodwill.
When someone is within the law, spouting statute and authorities to them only makes them think 'F**k you too' and respond in kind with the minimum possible.
Instead of going down that route another option may be to renegotiate a refund amount based upon the fact that you will be buying a different model from them and not someone else. This will most likely provide more scope for goodwill.
ETA
Although, they have had 2 shots at fixing it and buggered it up both times. I beleive that 3rd time around, its perfectly reasonable to request a refund or replacement. By replacement, a 2nd hand unit is not satisfactory. So either a replacement with a new like-for-like model ie closest spec, or a refund.
Although, they have had 2 shots at fixing it and buggered it up both times. I beleive that 3rd time around, its perfectly reasonable to request a refund or replacement. By replacement, a 2nd hand unit is not satisfactory. So either a replacement with a new like-for-like model ie closest spec, or a refund.
Max Turbo said:
ETA
Although, they have had 2 shots at fixing it and buggered it up both times. I beleive that 3rd time around, its perfectly reasonable to request a refund or replacement. By replacement, a 2nd hand unit is not satisfactory. So either a replacement with a new like-for-like model ie closest spec, or a refund.
Effectively. Although, they have had 2 shots at fixing it and buggered it up both times. I beleive that 3rd time around, its perfectly reasonable to request a refund or replacement. By replacement, a 2nd hand unit is not satisfactory. So either a replacement with a new like-for-like model ie closest spec, or a refund.
Also, when you put it in for repair this time, state this is the third and final time that you will accept a repair and in the event the product goes wrong again you will require a full unconditional refund.
Put this in writing, and keep a copy.
JustinP1 said:
Although that letter is good it should be pointed out that although the shop is not being hugely helpful, from what I can see here they are actually within the letter of the law.
When someone is within the law, spouting statute and authorities to them only makes them think 'F**k you too' and respond in kind with the minimum possible.
Instead of going down that route another option may be to renegotiate a refund amount based upon the fact that you will be buying a different model from them and not someone else. This will most likely provide more scope for goodwill.
What he said^When someone is within the law, spouting statute and authorities to them only makes them think 'F**k you too' and respond in kind with the minimum possible.
Instead of going down that route another option may be to renegotiate a refund amount based upon the fact that you will be buying a different model from them and not someone else. This will most likely provide more scope for goodwill.
They are not obliged to refund you unfortunatly, if it had broke twice in the first two weeks then yes they would have refund you but if you took them to a County Court they would not have the power to force the retailer to refund you, as far as the law is concerned they have acted well within the parameters of it and the law is there to proctect the retailer and the consumer, I don't think you have a case unless you have a contract with the retailer stating that they replace faulty products with new or refunds after six months. It's not the news you wanted but a County Court should have an unbiased decision based on the facts and the facts it's broken down in six months, they have offered to repair it or give a product of a similar value, they have done what they can.
furs307c said:
Thanks for all your help guys, I think the the best option might be to do as justin says and try to renegotiate based on the fact that they will be effectivley be making some more money if I buy another unit from them. They will still probably want to inspect it though.
You bought the projector in October. When did it first go wrong? When did it go wrong again?Depending upon the answers to these questions, the nay-sayers here may not be quite right
[/quote]
You bought the projector in October. When did it first go wrong? When did it go wrong again?
Depending upon the answers to these questions, the nay-sayers here may not be quite right
[/quote]
It could have gone wrong a 100 times in October it does not make a difference now, he should have asked for a refund or new replacement on the first occasion if the first breakdown was just after he bought it, can you imagine buying a brand new pair of shoes in October the laces snapping twice just after you bought them, then eight months later the laces snapping again so you go into the shop and demand a new pair or a refund, what do you think the answer would be?
Although I'm sypathetic towards the OPs situation it really grinds me that people think they can buy something a take back to a shop eight months later and demand their money back when they do not have a contract stating that the retailer will refund or replace after eight months! If you came into my shop demanding refunds or replacement after eight months I wouldn't even argue the toss with you I would just give you the telephone number for the local trading standards and let them waste their time explaining the facts, however if you came into my shop and explained your situation in a polite manor I would 100% give you a better service than what the law could offer you.
Edited by Number 5 on Sunday 3rd May 07:36
Number 5 said:
If you came into my shop demanding refunds or replacement after eight months I wouldn't even argue the toss with you I would just give you the telephone number for the local trading standards and let them waste their time explaining the facts, however if you came into my shop and explained your situation in a polite manor I would 100% give you a better service than what the law could offer you.
As I said before, exactly right.The Law is no excuse for using tact and politeness.
Especially if you don't know the law...
furs307c said:
Basically does anyone have an understanding of what rights i have to a refund. I bought a projector october last year, and it has been back for repair twice, and is stil not right. The company i bought it from will only repair it again, replace it with an equivilant aged item, or a partial refund. I stated what partial refund amount i was looking for but they dont want to agree to that amount and want me to send it back to inspect it first, meaning they have my projector and money.
help!
thanks
Actually, if it's your projector then it's their money. help!
thanks
number 5 said:
skwdenyer said:
You bought the projector in October. When did it first go wrong? When did it go wrong again?
Depending upon the answers to these questions, the nay-sayers here may not be quite right
It could have gone wrong a 100 times in October it does not make a difference now, he should have asked for a refund or new replacement on the first occasion if the first breakdown was just after he bought it, can you imagine buying a brand new pair of shoes in October the laces snapping twice just after you bought them, then eight months later the laces snapping again so you go into the shop and demand a new pair or a refund, what do you think the answer would be?Depending upon the answers to these questions, the nay-sayers here may not be quite right
Although I'm sypathetic towards the OPs situation it really grinds me that people think they can buy something a take back to a shop eight months later and demand their money back when they do not have a contract stating that the retailer will refund or replace after eight months! If you came into my shop demanding refunds or replacement after eight months I wouldn't even argue the toss with you I would just give you the telephone number for the local trading standards and let them waste their time explaining the facts, however if you came into my shop and explained your situation in a polite manor I would 100% give you a better service than what the law could offer you.
Edited by Number 5 on Sunday 3rd May 07:36
Anyhow, the item - if new - presumably had a manufacturer's warranty. Since the law was changed a few years ago, the manufacturer / importer / warrantor is now jointly and severally liable with the retailer. The retailer has to comply with Sale of Goods Act, but whoever provides the guarantee / warrantee can also be claimed-from directly by the purchaser.
So, a letter to the shop would be my first action here. Something like the following (assuming, as above, that the fault is the same fault):
"In October I purchased a XXX projector from you. As you know, it has been subject to a recurring fault as follows: {insert fault details here}. You have now tried twice to rectify the fault, but without success; the fault still remains.
I believe that, under the Sale of Goods Act, the projector is not of satisfactory quality; the projector is not fit for its purpose and does not meet the standards that any reasonable person would expect, in particular as regards durability and freedom from defects.
As you know, I have, without waiving any other rights, given you two separate opportunities to rectify the fault. As of today, the projector is again faulty. I'm afraid that I cannot continue to give you yet more opportunities to try to rectify the fault, which was clearly an inherent fault at the time I purchased the projector from you. I am therefore rejecting the projector. I believe that, in light of my allowing you opportunities to repair the projector, that the time taken to reject has been reasonable; I would have been happy had your first repair achieved the result!
I'm very sorry to have to take this step. However, I must preserve my rights, and use them to allow me to purchase a reliable and fully-functioning projector to meet my needs. I will come to your shop on [insert date], with the projector, so that I can receive my refund. If no refund is provided, however, I shall have to start proceedings against you to recover my monies.
Yours etc"
Basically the law says that, if a fault develops in the first 6 months, it is deemed to have been there from the start. You can demand a refund or replacement on those grounds alone. If you let the retailer try to fix it first, that's fine, but attempted - failed - fixes don't allow the retailer to escape the original essence of the problem. Retailers prefer otherwise, of course!
That is all very well, but there are a few assumptions there which may or may not be able to be all supported.
Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
JustinP1 said:
That is all very well, but there are a few assumptions there which may or may not be able to be all supported.
Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
I take your point. However, you earlier stated that you believed that the retailer was acting "within the letter of the law". I'm not sure that is the case, if the fault is a recurring one. The OP has stated that he has tried to secure a replacement, but has been offered only a used projector, and has been refused a refund. I can't see what you'd like him to do - go back and have groundhog day on the conversation?Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
I disagree with your last paragraph entirely. If the item had a fault within 6 months, it was - in law - there from the start. If the retailer has tried twice to fix it, and failed to fix it, then it is not reasonable to presume that it will magically fixed at a further attempt. Therefore it has taken 8 months to determine that there is an inherent, persistent defect. That is the very definition of reasonable in terms of rejection IMHO.
skwdenyer said:
JustinP1 said:
That is all very well, but there are a few assumptions there which may or may not be able to be all supported.
Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
I take your point. However, you earlier stated that you believed that the retailer was acting "within the letter of the law". I'm not sure that is the case, if the fault is a recurring one. The OP has stated that he has tried to secure a replacement, but has been offered only a used projector, and has been refused a refund. I can't see what you'd like him to do - go back and have groundhog day on the conversation?Secondly, when you go balls out, give a deadline and threaten legal action, you need to be 100% sure before you start that you have the case, ability and balls to go through with it, which will mean being at with a working item, having to pay to start a claim then having to go to court if it is defended.
IMHO it is not worth doing that at this stage. If a company knows the law, then a 'My balls are bigger than yours' approach may mean that not only are you put in your place to your own detriment, but you lose any goodwill the company might offer to resolve the problem.
Also IMHO at the moment the item has gone wrong with a fault which is known twice. That is not enough to reject 8 month old goods in court, you need more than that.
I disagree with your last paragraph entirely. If the item had a fault within 6 months, it was - in law - there from the start. If the retailer has tried twice to fix it, and failed to fix it, then it is not reasonable to presume that it will magically fixed at a further attempt. Therefore it has taken 8 months to determine that there is an inherent, persistent defect. That is the very definition of reasonable in terms of rejection IMHO.
The OP did not say it was a reoccurring fault. He merely said it has been repaired twice and is still 'not right'.
The OP HAS been offered a refund. Not a full refund because he is not entitled to it. The OP's issue is that he does not feel the partial refund is proportionate.
The 'law' with regard to the 6 month rule you have a bit skewed. The law does not say if an item develops a fault it was there from the start. The law says if a fault does develop in this time and the customer demands a refund, the onus is on the seller to prove it was not there from the start.
We are past 6 months now though. Therefore if the OP wants to go down that route he is going to have to prove to a court that the fault was inherent and thus there at time of purchase.
There is no guarantee he is going to do this and may well end up 'investing' days of his own time trying and failing to do that with nothing to show from it other than 6 months more without his projector which is now broken and out of warranty, as well as wasted court costs.
While all the OP wants is a larger refund or a better deal on another model, I hardly think that way forward is proportionate or beneficial to him.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff