Quick Consumer Rigths Question
Discussion
Bought a pair of motorcycle boots from a shop and the Velcro has subsequently failed after around 7 months and light use (winter).
Popped them back around 3 weeks ago and was told last week that they were still in the shop awaiting the brand representative to come in a look at them.
Rang the beginning of the week and they were still in the shop and the guy said he would send them off.
I said I needed them this week as the borrowed boots I was using need to be returned. I was told that I would have to wait until a warranty decision was made by the brand head office. I have been told I will just have to wait until a decision comes through on whether the claim will be a). Rejected, b). Boots replaced, c). Boots repaired. I have been advised that if it is a repair, it will be 1+ month wait for a repair.
Surely my deal is with the shop and not the brand?
Do I have any moves/recourse?
Just noticed my typo in the title. Apologies.
Popped them back around 3 weeks ago and was told last week that they were still in the shop awaiting the brand representative to come in a look at them.
Rang the beginning of the week and they were still in the shop and the guy said he would send them off.
I said I needed them this week as the borrowed boots I was using need to be returned. I was told that I would have to wait until a warranty decision was made by the brand head office. I have been told I will just have to wait until a decision comes through on whether the claim will be a). Rejected, b). Boots replaced, c). Boots repaired. I have been advised that if it is a repair, it will be 1+ month wait for a repair.
Surely my deal is with the shop and not the brand?
Do I have any moves/recourse?
Just noticed my typo in the title. Apologies.
I would suggest that they are correct. They are allowed reasonable time to repair, and if you take precipitate action it will be for you to prove that the time was unreasonable (because you will be suing them). You are also expected to suffer some inconvenience, as long as it is not significant. So, as before, it would be for you to prove that having to wear a different pair of shoes was a significant inconvenience.
hutchst said:
I would suggest that they are correct. They are allowed reasonable time to repair, and if you take precipitate action it will be for you to prove that the time was unreasonable (because you will be suing them). You are also expected to suffer some inconvenience, as long as it is not significant. So, as before, it would be for you to prove that having to wear a different pair of shoes was a significant inconvenience.
It's what I figured, just annoying as I use my motorbike boots to get to work in and have been borrowing a pair from my brother, who needs them back nopw. I thought it was quite cheeky for the shop to "offer" to sell me a new pair of boots whilst mine were in for repair.
If I need to get a new pair, I won't be getting them from that shop. Nor will they get my business in the future.
The vendor is responsible and you can benefit from the guarantee if you choose to. The vendor is suggesting that warranty decisions are binding and this, of course, is untrue.
Id insist on a refund as the timescale is unreasonable, you will have to fight and they will probably try to shagt you with a poorly calculated depreciated credit. Personally, I wouldnt entertain a depreciated credit begore 12mths has passed.
Id insist on a refund as the timescale is unreasonable, you will have to fight and they will probably try to shagt you with a poorly calculated depreciated credit. Personally, I wouldnt entertain a depreciated credit begore 12mths has passed.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff