refunds policies...

  • Thread starter disgruntled customer
  • Start date
D

disgruntled customer

Guest
Hi all,

In November I purchased a cushion (€ 25) from one of our largest retail chains. The zip went in this cushion last weekend (9/01). During last week I called this branch's customer service department to see what I should do under the circumstances - the girl advised that all I needed to do was bring it in and they would either give me a refund or another (didn't take the girl's name - silly me).
I went back to this retail chain yesterday to see about what they would for me under the circumstances.
I was told their refund policy does not cover zips - I looked at her in disbelief. Apparently this chain does not get a refund from the manufacturer for goods returned where the zip has failed. Hence they have "no credit to pass on" to the customer. "Zips go" is what she told me.
After a lengthy tooing and frooing I had to resort to my Sale of Goods Act quote and merchantible quality line at which stage she finally said the only option they could give me was that they would try to repair it. Is this the case? I gave in and said ok - I regret this now and wish I had stood my ground and requested a refund.
Thing is if they can't fix this cushion or if the repair is not up to scratch and it splits again next month what comeback do I have? Do I have any?
 
Re: faulty goods.

I think that you should draft a letter stating your case so far. You should also state that in the event that the repair is not satisfactory, you reserve your consumer rights in relation to faulty goods.

Generally, one's rights decrease with time. You bought the product in November. That is only 2 months' ago!

I think you should also complain to [broken link removed] If this retail outlet knew that they were not going to honour complaints regarding faulty zips, why wasn't this mentioned when you bought the product?[/quote]

Marion :hat
 
Zippy.

Bought a jacket in Sacha. Zip went soon after. Brought it back. They repaired it in a couple of days, no problem. Staff couldn't have been nicer.
 
..

Bottom line is how long the zip could reasonably be expected to last.

Two months seem like a short space of time but on the other hand it could be argued that a cushion gets roughed about more than, say, an item of clothing. (Not saying that this is the case - merely that the argument could be made)

Assuming however, that the shop takes responsibility, they are merely obliged to repair the item to the condition in which it was sold. Only when they fail to do this can you insist on a replacement or refund (in that order).
 
It seems strange to me that they would prefer to repair than replace. Assuming that the retail outlet doesn't have in-house seamstresses, the cost of sending it out for repair, doing the repair, sending it back to the shop would probably exceed the actual cost of the cushion.
 
Re: repair first

Hi Bamboo

I have been meaning to ask you this before, but I forgot. Why do you say that the consumers' rights are in the particular order: repair, replace, refund.

I know that this is how it is worded in the act, but it has always been my understanding and would seem to be consistent with the viewpoint expressed on the [broken link removed] link, that the consumer would be entitiled to a refund in the first instance if they act promptly.

Consumer purchases shoes. After one wear the heels fall off the shoes. Shop will only offer a repair.

Because the fault occurred so early in the life of the product consumer has a case for seeking a refund. If shop insists on a repair the consumer may; (a) accept this, but put in writing to the retailer that if the repair is not successful, they reserve their right to seek either a replacement or refund, or, (b) take the case to the Small Claims Court.

Thanks

Marion :h
Click to expand...
 
..

Hi Marion

There are no exact rules but in most cases, the repair, replace refund sequence of dealing with customer complaints will apply. However, there are occasions when to repair couldn't really be considered acceptable - the example of the shoes is a good one. If a heel goes after a few days of normal wear, it's a sign of a fundamental flaw and it would be hard to imagine how even the most careful repair would restore them to a perfect condition.

On the other hand, if a repair could restore an item to pristine condition (e.g to replace a zip in a cushion or to replace a car part a minor repair) without compromise to the normal lifespan or usefulness of the item, then it's reasonable for the retailer to offer this as a first means of dealing with a faulty item.

Hope this helps.
 
..

Bamboo,

They advise that the only thing they can do for me is an attempted repair. Their refunds policy does not cover zips and as such I am not entitled to anything - they are doing the repair as a kind of gesture to me.
I would have thought that this policy is in breach of my rights in light of the fact that this item has not been misused in anyway and should reasonably be expected to last much longer than 2 months.
When I called the ODCA the girl didn't seem too sure as to what I could do, in light of their rejection of my claim due to their policy guidelines, except for the repair replace refund line.
I have decided to put it all in writing to the ODCA and see what they reply to me with.
 
and

thanks all for your replies and advice
 
..

DG

Whatever their preferred policy, it can't override or substitute your statutory rights as a consumer.

You've said that the item wasn't abused/mishandled in any way. You're quite right therefore when you say that the item should reasonably have provided a usefulness for longer than it did. If the shop continues to play hardball and/or you are unhappy with the repair, your ultimate sanction is to take a claim through the Small Claims Court (costs about a tenner). The ODCA website ( [broken link removed] ) will have details on how to go about this process.

Incidentally, the role of ODCA is to advise you of your rights and possible courses of action. They'd be unlikely to intervene directly and even if they did, couldn't force the shop to offer a replacement/refund - that's the job of the Small Claims Court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top