# Repair, refund or replacement?



## bobjim (18 Sep 2006)

Does anyone know whether any of these 3 options is the default one? I bought an item from a large electronics store which does not work properly. Unfortunately, I didn't actually open it until after the store's 2 week return limit had passed. I'm aware that consumer rights ensure that the store must offer a refund, repair or replacement but can I insist on a refund? They are offering only a replacement, take it or leave it, no discussion, with a f-you attitude and I'm so annoyed now that I'm considering going the small claims route.

Cheers,
BobJim


----------



## Humpback (18 Sep 2006)

bobjim said:


> Does anyone know whether any of these 3 options is the default one?



There is no default, but by convention, normally shops will repair first, then replace and finally refund.



bobjim said:


> Unfortunately, I didn't actually open it until after the store's 2 week return limit had passed.


 
Can you explain more about this "2 week return limit"? There is no such thing in legislation, so unless this is something extra offered (by way of a benefit rather than a restriction) by the store, they cannot enforce any such limit.



bobjim said:


> but can I insist on a refund?



No. You can't insist. The shop is at liberty to follow either the repair or replace route first.




bobjim said:


> They are offering only a replacement, take it or leave it, no discussion, with a f-you attitude



What's your problem if they're providing a replacement for you? Aren't you getting the product that you purchased in full working order if you're getting a replacement?

Unless you've changed your mind about not wanting this product in the first place? Which isn't covered by any legislation.



bobjim said:


> I'm so annoyed now that I'm considering going the small claims route.


 
You have no claims (at the moment) for the Small Claims Court. The shop are offering a replacement to you, which is a good deal for you. 

You could, as happens in cases, be left for months without the item at all while they get it repaired.


----------



## Marion (18 Sep 2006)

> There is no default, but by convention, normally shops will repair first, then replace and finally refund.



Hi RDJ

But, does the consumer have to accept this convention which suits the retailer? 

I don't think a consumer_ has_ to accept a repair if the faulty good is returned promptly.

If the OP does accept a repair they should give a letter stating that they still reserve their consumer rights.

The terms and conditons of the sale cannot limit the consumer's rights where the good is not merchantable.


Marion


----------



## Humpback (19 Sep 2006)

Marion said:


> But, does the consumer have to accept this convention which suits the retailer?
> 
> I don't think a consumer_ has_ to accept a repair if the faulty good is returned promptly.


 
From my understanding, the act is sufficiently unclear to ensure that the consumer can do nothing if a shop _insists_ on repairing something rather than providing a replacement.



Marion said:


> If the OP does accept a repair they should give a letter in writing stating that they still reserve their consumer rights.


 
I wouldn't think that a letter is necessary. If they receive a replacement, their consumer rights still apply - they've bought a good which needs to be fit for purpose etc.



Marion said:


> The terms and conditons of the sale cannot limit the consumer's rights where the good is not merchantable.


 
I presume you're referring to the 2 weeks here mentioned by the OP. I was trying to touch on this when asking what exactly the shop was referring to here. If this was a positive condition, then fine, but if it was a negative condition, it can be disregarded.

As you say, where a shop has a sign saying "No Returns", as I saw recently in a hat shop in Dublin 2, this doesn't apply because of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services legislation.


----------



## Superman (19 Sep 2006)

Repair, refund and replace are rights under the European Legislation. (The EC Directive on Certain Aspects of the Sale of Consumer Goods and Associated Guarantees).  The Seller has the option of choosing whichever remedy best suits him/her.

They are not the rights under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act.

Each act has different criteria which apply as to whether they kick in or not.

If you fulfill the criteria of the Sale of Goods Act - for example if the goods are not merchantable quality, then you might be able to get in under the Sale of Goods Act itself, which would mean you get a refund.

BTW, the reason the rights under the European Legislation are not as pro consumer, is  that the duties imposed on the Seller are higher (for example reversal of burden of proof, they last longer etc.)


----------



## Humpback (19 Sep 2006)

Superman said:


> Repair, refund and replace are rights under the European Legislation. (The EC Directive on Certain Aspects of the Sale of Consumer Goods and Associated Guarantees).
> ...
> They are not the rights under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act.
> ...
> Each act has different criteria which apply as to whether they kick in or not.


 
The rights to repair, replacement and refund are explicitly set out in *BOTH* the Sale of Good and Supply of Services act, and the EC legislation you quote. These acts are not mutually exclusive. Their main criteria are essentially the same - termed differently, but functionally the same.



Superman said:


> The Seller has the option of choosing whichever remedy best suits him/her.


 
The buyer does have the option to chose which suits them best, yes, but they are not entitled specifically to whichever option they would prefer themselves. Legislation has enough there to allow the seller determine which they are in the best position to chose.

For example, the EC legislation states:



> Either (repair/replacement) of these remedies shall be deemed to be disproportionate if it imposes costs on the seller which, in comparison with those of the other remedy or of any other remedy mentioned in this Regulation, are unreasonable


 



Superman said:


> If you fulfill the criteria of the Sale of Goods Act - for example if the goods are not merchantable quality, then you might be able to get in under the Sale of Goods Act itself, which would mean you get a refund.


 
Not necessarily. If the goods are not of merchantable quality, then the seller is entitled to first offer to repair the good, and then offer to replace them. As a last resort he can offer to refund the money - but you are not automatically entitled to a refund.



Superman said:


> BTW, the reason the rights under the European Legislation are not as pro consumer, is that the duties imposed on the Seller are higher (for example reversal of burden of proof, they last longer etc.)


 
This doesn't really matter because Irish legislation (Sale of Goods and Supply of Services) has equal footing with the EC legislation.

As the EC statute says - 



> In particular, Regulation 4 is in addition to, and not in substitution for, a provision of any other enactment that provides that a consumer shall not be deprived, by virtue of a choice of the kind mentioned in that Regulation, of the protection afforded by any enactment.


----------



## irishlinks (19 Sep 2006)

According to the consumer association website  if the goods are not of merchantable quality...
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]"_If you are happy with a replacement product, take it. If not, remember you are not legally obliged to accept an exchange._[/FONT]_ "_

[broken link removed]


----------



## bobjim (21 Sep 2006)

Thanks for all the replies. Just to clarify: the store has a policy whereby you can return any item within 2 weeks and get a refund i.e. if you change your mind and no longer want it. 

The reason I no longer want the item is simply the attitude of the staff when I returned with the defective item. They originally tried to fob me off with a credit note so I checked with the Office of Consumer Affairs as to my rights in this situation and was told that credit notes are absolutely not on. When I returned to the store with this info, the manager seemed annoyed that I dared contradict him! He simply offered a replacement and walked off. It would seem from the info here that he was correct but he could have been more pleasant and I probably would have accepted the replacement. I just can't believe that the staff of a major store could have such poor customer service.

Anyway, looks like I'll have to take a replacement but I certainly will never set foot in there again.

Cheers!


----------

