# DON'T GET RIPPED OFF!



## trevtheturner (13 Jul 2004)

aa


----------



## cambournepete (13 Jul 2004)

A friend bought a Bosch green jigsaw a couple of years ago. He's not used it much, but a month ago the red plastic quick-release blade holder lever snapped. Friend not impressed, so contacted Bosch, who offered to replace saw for him if he sent them the old one. After a little discussion they agreed to pick it up from him as well. All without the till receipt.

Result - one happy customer with a new jigsaw. Well done Bosch.


----------



## Mike.C (13 Jul 2004)

Hi Trev, 

Thank you very much for the information. The fact is that not many of us know the law and the retailers will certainly not tell us what i rights are.

No offence Tony but yours is typical of how the seller can rip us off. For a major company like PC World to tell him that his digital camera is only guarantee for 28 days is totally diabolical. I do hope you sorted it out in the end Tony.

Well done Trev

Regards

Mike.C


----------



## Mike.C (13 Jul 2004)

Hi Cambournepete,

Well done Bosch, i wish that all companies acted like them.

Regards

Mike.C


----------



## mudman (13 Jul 2004)

As you may have read in another thread, I often have to go back to the seller. I also find that it is very rare that you have to start quoting things like 'fit for purpose' 'sale of goods act' and the like. But when you do, you generally reveal yourself as someone who has done his homework and things are very soon put right.
Last time I had this was when my son's PC keeled over with a knackered BIOS. I contacted the company who told me that as it was out of warranty that I'd have to phone the support line at £1.00 a minute :shock: 
After calmly explaining that this was not acceptable and using a suitable phrase 'fit for purpose' this time. A disk was despatched that reached me the next day.
Mind you that still didn't work. I should have invoiced them for time spent. Never thought of that. :twisted: 

Cheers,
Barry


----------



## Anonymous (13 Jul 2004)

One thing to be aware of - the sale of goods act applies to the private consumer, and does not extend to business AFAIK.

I used to work in the computer industry and their standard warranty terms were 90 days. Beyond that and you had to purchase a service agreement.

Andrew


----------



## trevtheturner (13 Jul 2004)

Hi Handymac,

The Act does, in fact, cover both.

A buyer who buys in the course of a business is defined as a 'purchaser'.
A person not buying in the course of a business is defined as a 'consumer'.

The reason they are defined separately is because slightly different rules apply to 'consumers.' Both may seek damages of an amount necessary to have the goods repaired or replaced. But a 'consumer' has the statutory right to seek repair or replacement as an alternative to seeking damages.

Service agreements are fine for routine maintenance and normal wear and tear repairs, but cannot override the Act in respect of goods having to conform to contract.

Some retailers also positively encourage consumers to purchase "extended warranties". These again can cloud an issue, but cannot override the provisions of the Act.

Cheers,

Trev.


----------



## trevtheturner (13 Jul 2004)

Hi, Barry,

Exactly! It's worth knowing the game, isn't it? - it usually works without things going too far if you a have a genuine case and won't let yourself be put off. Good on you!

Cheers,

Trev.


----------



## johnelliott (13 Jul 2004)

Best advice I can offer to anyone buying a washing machine or similar, buy from a really big company. If it all goes wrong and the nan behind the counter tells you to p*** off, and he owns the company, then you are going to have to go to court. If OTOH he is merely a manager, and there's a big cheese in London or somewhere, then the chances are you can get it sorted with some carefully applied aggro
John[/i]


----------



## Anonymous (13 Jul 2004)

Didn't work for me for Screwfix a few months back.

I needed a tool urgently for a job. I paid the £9 premium delivery charge to deliver the next day before 10am.

At 10:05am the next day I phoned Screwfix to ask where my order was, thinking it was running a bit late. I was told "oops, sorry sir, it's in the warehouse having been packed but we forgot to ship it last night". I lost a days productivity.

Despite the fuss I made I didn't get an apology or a £5 voucher. It took Screwfix over a week to refund the £9.

Andrew


----------



## mudman (14 Jul 2004)

One tip I was given was to never complain to the complaints department. The best people to complain to are the ones at the top. They do care (generally) if the company's name is getting besmirched.
A great way to do this is to find out the name of the managing director, also find out what format the company e-mail addresses take. Got to their website and find a few contact addresses to do this. Then send a load of e-mails to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and whatever other combinations you can think of. It's a fair bet that one of these will be the right one and get to the man in question and action will be taken.
It really does work, my wife did it and a colleague did as well and results are usually quite rapidly forthcoming. Even if he passes it on to the complaints dept. they will generally deal with it knowing the boss is interested.


----------



## Terry Smart (14 Jul 2004)

A little something to add to this thread which I don't think has been mentioned yet; a law passed in 2000 which comes under the 'Distance Selling Regulations' allows for a seven day 'cooling off' period on any purchase made by mail order, telephone, internet etc. 
The main reason for this is to allow the buyer to an opportunity to examine the goods to make sure they are what was expected.
Most companies worth dealing with will offer this as a matter of course, but if someone tries to tell you you can't change your mind on something bought in this way they are wrong. So long as you notify them within seven days and can return the item unused and in original packing they have to accept it back.

For more information see

http://www.oft.gov.uk/Consumer/Your+Rights+When+Shopping+From+Home/shopping+from+home+cancelling.htm

(and no, this isn't the reason we don't have a mail order service!!!)


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2004)

Good post Trev.

Further legislation to that already mentioned is set out in "The unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999"

When I was in dispute with a rather large company well known to all of us I had cause to quote section 5 of the act and I quote

" UNFAIR TERMS
5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

Many firms have clauses in their T&C's which would contravene the act in this respect.

If you think that a firms T&C's may be unfair in any dispute you find yourself in, this is a very handy section

It has certainly helped me in the past.

cheers

billzee


----------



## Anonymous (14 Jul 2004)

> Despite the fuss I made I didn't get an apology or a £5 voucher. It took Screwfix over a week to refund the £9



With respect, you didn't try hard enough.

Some companys only capitulate when court action is imminent and this makes it tough on consumers when they get a raw deal.

The only way though is to push it to the wire. Its the only way to keep some firms on their toes.


----------



## trevtheturner (14 Jul 2004)

Hi billzee,

Didn't know about those 1999 Regs. I'll look them up and have a read. 

Thanks for the info. - very worthwhile knowing because, in my experience, terms & conditions are often biased against the customer, apparently in contravention of the Reg. you have quoted.

Cheers,

Trev.


----------



## Anonymous (16 Jul 2004)

Mike.C":1i0iifex said:


> Hi Trev,
> 
> No offence Tony but yours is typical of how the seller can rip us off. For a major company like PC World to tell him that his digital camera is only guarantee for 28 days is totally diabolical. I do hope you sorted it out in the end Tony.
> 
> ...



Mike. This is not what I actually said. PCWorld did not say that it was covered for only 28 days. They stated that it became the responsibility of the manufacturer after 28 days - this is very common practice amongst shops of this type and does not contravene any laws/regulations.

I now have a brand new camera delivered to my house on 12th July just as PCWorld/HP agreed.

A little more hassle than I expected but all OK in the end


----------



## Mike.C (16 Jul 2004)

Hi Tony,

I am sorry, i know that you are 100% convinced of what you say, but over the last few days i have been in touch with Trading standards, Citizens Advice and all over the web (nothing to do with Axminster i just want to know my rights), and no matter what PC World told you it is not the responsibility of the manufacturer after 28 days. In fact as far as you are concerned it is not the responsibility of the manufacturer at all. Your contract is with PC World and not HP. The contract with HP is between PC World and themselves. In law HP do not have to deal with you at all. Although i have found out that it would be very rare for them to refuse to help you even if only as a gesture of good will. 

It seems that most of us are ill informed or we do not know our rights at all, and this includes a lot of staff that work for these companies.

Trev seems to know a lot about the law so just ask him, or go to a Citizens Advice or Trading Standards site and you can see for yourself. These sites are there to help us and they are not going to post the rules/regs if they are not true.

These companies try to feed us with a load of rubbish and most of us believe them. As has been mentioned before these companies tell you how long the warranty is for etc, etc, and usually in very small letters they quote the law (because they have to) "This does not affect you statutory Rights" and some of your statutory rights i have already told you.

I am glad that you got a new camera and i hope that you enjoy it for many moons to come.

All the best

Mike.C


----------



## trevtheturner (16 Jul 2004)

Hi Tony,

Mike.C is absolutely correct in what he says.

Pleased to hear your problem is sorted but, in law, PC World should have provided you directly with a replacement. Look at it this way - regardless of what PC World choose to tell their customers, if it came to it who would you sue? Not HP because *you haven't bought anything from them!* PC World buy goods from HP and then retail them - that is what they choose to do. Your contract is between yourself and PC World only.

Cheers,

Trev.


----------



## Anonymous (16 Jul 2004)

HI guys

I do not dispute what you say. However, here is PCworld's terms and conditions which clearly cannot contravene any laws or they would be sued mercilessly

'If there is a fault with your product within 12 months of delivery (or other defect with your order), we will normally offer a prompt repair, exchange or refund. We will always offer you the choice of an exchange or refund if the fault occurs within 28 days of delivery. 

To qualify for a refund or exchange the product must be:-

in otherwise in 'as-new' condition; 
complete with any accessories and free gifts offered with it (and, if possible, the original box and packaging). '

In my case they did just this. They accepted that the item required repair and was more than 28 days old. HP took over from there.

PCWorld only employs morons who know jack about PCs (especially their 'technical support people'). I know this because I DO know a lot about PCs as processor based systems and software development formed a major part of my degree and current degree level teaching.

To be honest, would any self respecting IT graduate with any knowledge about PCs work for the wages they pay?

Rant over (I get embarrased hearing the rubbish PCWorlds 'technicians' dish out to the public)


----------



## Newbie_Neil (17 Jul 2004)

Hi all

Slightly off topic, but not too much.

Did you hear the one about the person who took their pc back to a well known high street electrical retailer and had their money back. He was told all of his data would be removed before it was put up for sale again.

OK, you've probably guessed it.

Two weeks later he goes to another branch of the same well known high street electrical retailer on the other side of town and buys another pc. He gets it home and what do you know, it is the original pc complete with all of his data.

Cheers
Neil

PC I was told this story by an ex-employee of the well known high street electrical retailer.


----------



## johnelliott (17 Jul 2004)

Having read what Tony says about the PC World 28 day thing, I think I can rephrase it to fit it to the current legislation. What PC World are doing is to offer MORE than the laws demands. They are drawing the line at 28 days, during which time they will exchange or refund on the product, it being assumed that the product is, effectively, new. After that time it is assumed (perhaps wrongly, but more likely correctly) that the customer has had some use out of the product and that it has gone wrong rather than started out faulty. Where this is the case the seller is not obliged to replace it or refund it, only to return it to correct operation within a reasonable time.
Whether the repair (or replecement if that is more economic) is carried out by the manufacturer or the seller doesn't matter. The seller remains _responsible_ but may well delegate the actual repair work to someone else (in this case the manufacturer). This has been the case with domestic appliances for decades.

John


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

Thanks John, that makes sense to me. I was a bit annoyed by PCWorld's stance but all was sorted within a week.


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

jelliott,

They are certainly NOT doing more then the law demands. What they ARE doing is to try and make you think that they are, and in your case this seems to have worked. They do this so you will be a good little boy and shop there again.

They did nothing more then they had to, and thats that. I hope that this clarifies the law for you.

Cheers 

Woodsman


----------



## johnelliott (17 Jul 2004)

woodsman":4tjs2u0n said:


> I hope that this clarifies the law for you.



If you want to make things clear for me (and the rest of us) then you are going to have to work a lot harder than that.
In any case you are wrong- If a person buys a product and uses it successfully for 27 days (thus demonstrating that it was NOT faulty when purchased), and it goes wrong on the 28th then the law does not require the seller to replace it with a new item, or to refund the money. The law requires that the product should be put right. If the seller chooses to replace it then he is doing more than the law requires
John


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

> I do not dispute what you say. However, here is PCworld's terms and conditions which clearly cannot contravene any laws or they would be sued mercilessly



Not necessarily.

IMO many firms have T&C's which contravene your rights, why else would there be specific legislation to cover it if this were not so. Here is my post on the subject


> Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:31 pm Post subject:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

from tony...


> I recently had a digital camera refuse to switch on after 6 months. PC world's policy is not to fix/replace items after 28 days
> :evil:



Tony, the above is your original post on the subject of your camera. It is what I and others initially responded too and clearly the word *fix*, if correct, would have put PC world within breach of current legislation, particularly in reference to the act quoted in my last post.

However your more recent post concerning Pc worlds T&C's containg this..


> 'If there is a fault with your product within 12 months of delivery (or other defect with your order), we will normally offer a prompt repair, exchange or refund. We will always offer you the choice of an exchange or refund if the fault occurs within 28 days of delivery.


 is clearly different and therefore changes the argument.

I am sure this was just an oversight on your part.


----------



## johnelliott (17 Jul 2004)

Anyone else getting a bit bored with all this?

As long as the non-working stuff is replaced, refunded or repaired I don't think it really matters too much what the actual legal position is, and in any case, if legal stuff was set in stone it wouldn't be necessary for lawyers to argue over them in court.

What is evident is that if a customer has a legitimate complaint, and they present that complaint to *the right person*, then nearly always it will get sorted out whether they bought it 27 days ago, or 29 days or 13 months

John


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

> Anyone else getting a bit bored with all this?
> ..As long as the non-working stuff is replaced, refunded or repaired I don't think it really matters too much what the actual legal position is..



TBF John, it seemed to matter to you a fair bit , not long ago either.

I wonder if perhaps the boredom may be setting in due to clarification?


----------



## johnelliott (17 Jul 2004)

bilzee":12z61cso said:


> > Anyone else getting a bit bored with all this?
> > ..As long as the non-working stuff is replaced, refunded or repaired I don't think it really matters too much what the actual legal position is..
> 
> 
> ...



Have it your own way, pity there isn't an emoticon with the gesture I have in mind
John


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

from john


> Have it your own way, pity there isn't an emoticon with the gesture I have in mind



very neighbourly John

Its surprising how truth refreshes the parts others can't reach

cheers

billzee :wink:


----------



## johnelliott (17 Jul 2004)

billzee":1iyovl0e said:


> Its surprising how truth refreshes the parts others can't reach



Which, the truth as Billzee sees it, or the real truth? The real truth, BTW, is that you are insisting on having the last word in an argument that has no real basis. When I suggested that we were all getting bored with this, that would have been a good point at which to end it. Oh no, not good enough for Billzee, got to have another dig. You haven't proved _anything_. Stop trying to draw this discussion out, and stop trying to be a smart-****

John


----------



## Alf (17 Jul 2004)

Enough, the pair of you. And that's an official "drop it", not a gentle suggestion. I would hope you'd both have the good sense to delete your offending posts too.

Alf, moderator


----------



## Anonymous (17 Jul 2004)

> I would hope you'd both have the good sense to delete your offending posts too.



If the 'truth' offends alf as it apparently does, even when it is offered in the most gentle of ways, then I plead guilty.

,.... but when that truth is offered with a mild humour it seems to cut far deeper as recent events seem to prove

On balance I would say I should be the most offended. I'm not because one needs to be surprised to be offended

cheers

billzee


----------



## Mike.C (17 Jul 2004)

regards

mike.c


----------



## Midnight (18 Jul 2004)

If someone mentiones a group hug...... I'm gonna be sick.

;P~~

:wink:


----------



## Alf (18 Jul 2004)

bilzee":2j63jx81 said:


> > I would hope you'd both have the good sense to delete your offending posts too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I take it that'll be a No then. I, too, am not surprised. Now leave the thread alone, billzee, as you were asked, please.

Alf


----------

