Consumer Rights Mini-Guide Discussion Area

[MSE Alana]

This thread is specifically to discuss the

Free Wallet-Sized Consumer Rights Mini-Guide

If you want to discuss this mini-guide please click reply.

[mroakley]

Am loving the new mini, pull-out consumer guide! However, one area is still unclear for me:
What are your rights if the goods you've purchased turn out to be faulty, you can't find your receipt, and you have no other "proof of purchase" such as a credit/debit card statement because you originally paid in cash?

[neilmcl]

If there's no proof of purchase then how can the "alledged" retailer be liable.

[gordikin]

Originally Posted by mroakley

...What are your rights if the goods you've purchased turn out to be faulty, you can't find your receipt, and you have no other "proof of purchase" such as a credit/debit card statement because you originally paid in cash?

One word:- None!

[Tozer]

Without wishing to sound negative, I think this pull-out guide is far, far too simplistic.

It is absolutely pointless just pulling out a piece of paper and quoting extracts from legal principles to sales people. If the retailer is not complying with the law, then I really fail to see how this little scrap of paper will change any minds.

[dmg24]

Originally Posted by Tozer

Without wishing to sound negative, I think this pull-out guide is far, far too simplistic.

It is absolutely pointless just pulling out a piece of paper and quoting extracts from legal principles to sales people. If the retailer is not complying with the law, then I really fail to see how this little scrap of paper will change any minds.

As evidenced by the OP in the following thread:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2136093

[Canute]

The mini guide is good. The question I raise is: Am I right in beleiving that the EU rules/regs re consumer protection state that all goods manufactured/purchased? in the EU should be guaranteed for a minimum 2 years. So this , if I am correct should be included. I believe this was a ruling for minimum expectation of the length of time goods should be expected to remain free from breakdown after purchase - in other words "Fit for purpose"

[Anihilator]

Personally think its a lot of !!!! that will lead to more threads from people who cant understand things properly, or read a contract.

Some of the comments are questionable legally too as whilst they are correct the theory doesnt always match.

[DrScotsman]

Originally Posted by Canute

The mini guide is good. The question I raise is: Am I right in beleiving that the EU rules/regs re consumer protection state that all goods manufactured/purchased? in the EU should be guaranteed for a minimum 2 years. So this , if I am correct should be included. I believe this was a ruling for minimum expectation of the length of time goods should be expected to remain free from breakdown after purchase - in other words "Fit for purpose"

This "secret EU law" rubbish is STILL going on? If I dismiss this at the beginning of this thread then maybe some people will listen, so here I go:

1. An EU directive is NOT law. It is something that is to be implemented in the member states' own legal system (and in the UK this one has)
2. It does not state that goods have to last two years. Read it:

Article 3
Rights of the consumer
1. The seller shall be liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists at the time the goods were delivered.
2. In the case of a lack of conformity, the consumer shall be entitled to have the goods brought into conformity free of charge by repair or replacement, in accordance with paragraph 3, or to have an appropriate reduction made in the price or the contract rescinded with regard to those goods, in accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6.

Article 5
Time limits
1. The seller shall be held liable under Article 3 where the lack of conformity becomes apparent within two years as from delivery of the goods. If, under national legislation, the rights laid down in Article 3(2) are subject to a limitation period, that period shall not expire within a period of two years from the time of delivery.

All this says is that if goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale/delivery then any limitation period for the consumer bringing action against the seller has to be greater than 2 years. In the UK it's 6 years.

Goods conforming to contract at the time of sale (and hence lasting a reasonable length of time) is entirely dependant on the goods. While a lot of things you would try to apply this too should last at least 2 years (laptop, washing machine), a lot of things will not be expected to last at least 2 years.

[4743hudsonj]

Originally Posted by DrScotsman

This "secret EU law" rubbish is STILL going on? If I dismiss this at the beginning of this thread then maybe some people will listen, so here I go:

1. An EU directive is NOT law. It is something that is to be implemented in the member states' own legal system (and in the UK this one has)
2. It does not state that goods have to last two years. Read it:



All this says is that if goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale/delivery then any limitation period for the consumer bringing action against the seller has to be greater than 2 years. In the UK it's 6 years.

Goods conforming to contract at the time of sale (and hence lasting a reasonable length of time) is entirely dependant on the goods. While a lot of things you would try to apply this too should last at least 2 years (laptop, washing machine), a lot of things will not be expected to last at least 2 years.

Eugh, Thankyou for having sanity!

I couldn't cope explaining what a directive is another time.

[flapjack]

I have a problem. I just ordered 2 of the same item (some car sticker packs) from a mail order company via the internet. I was charged for 2, the invoice that came with the goods mentions 2 were enclosed but they only included one in the jiffybag.
What are my consumer rights? Is it my word against theirs if they dig their heels in and deny all knowledge, and if so where does the burden of proof lie?
:confused:
Any advice?

[Esqui]

Contact them first

[tomloaf]

Hi

I am in the process of commissioning a bit of jewelry for my girlfriend. I email a jeweler we talked about the design and he emailed me a quote (just in the email as in "that will cost £500" I asked about some other possible changes and he said "oh that will reduce it by £100".
I have paid the deposit in person and now am just going to pick it up next week. When I asked him to confirm the final balance he said it was a lot more then the original quote approximate 27% more on a £500 is item. I have pointed out the email to him and he still stand by the new price. What rights do i have as i have paid a substantial deposit.

Please help

I don’t want to be charged about £150 more than I was originally quoted
Thanks
Tom

[Slim]

If an item is replaced because of faults should the replacement have a twelve month guarantee starting from the date of the original purchase or the date of providing the replacement? Is there any law on this?
Thanks

[bingo bango]

Originally Posted by Slim

If an item is replaced because of faults should the replacement have a twelve month guarantee starting from the date of the original purchase or the date of providing the replacement? Is there any law on this?
Thanks

No. The Limitations Act 1980 stipulates that the time bar for civil action in the UK is 6 years (for consumer legislation anyway).

What this means is that you have your rights under SoGA for up to 6 years from purchase. Any repairs or replacements in that period are simply a continuation of your original contract, not a renewal.

[bronzeharness1]

Hi people,

Have been reading this thread with interest. Can someone advise me with a problem i have? I bought a digital TV from Currys about 2 and half years ago, on a 1 year guarantee. Some minor faults have developed recently (HDMI port, and remote control no longer work). This is not through my mistreatment!

As its under 6 years ago,can i require the retailer to investigate the fault? Do i have to prove it doesn't work? Also if i don't have the original packaging does this matter (i have the receipt)?

Thanks

[derrick]

Originally Posted by bronzeharness1

Hi people,

Have been reading this thread with interest. Can someone advise me with a problem i have? I bought a digital TV from Currys about 2 and half years ago, on a 1 year guarantee. Some minor faults have developed recently (HDMI port, and remote control no longer work). This is not through my mistreatment!

As its under 6 years ago,can i require the retailer to investigate the fault? Do i have to prove it doesn't work? Also if i don't have the original packaging does this matter (i have the receipt)?

Thanks

Place this on the Consumer Rights thread, which is a sticky at the top of the page, you will receive more response there.

You can go back to the retailer under SoGA, but you will need an engineers report,(refundable from the retailer if in your favour), to prove an inherent fault, unless the retailer gives in right away, but as it is Currys, you will have a fight on your hands.

Packaging is irrelevant.



.

[TrippingOwl]

I bought a hat in a shop in Camden, have the receipt, and the hat is in perfect condition. As I bought it for a friend, I knew it might not be the right size, so I checked with the sales person to make sure I could return it for a new one, who said yes. At the same time, I used a coupon for that shop offering me 20% off. There were no conditions written on that coupon restricting the products I could buy with it: it was a general 20% off.

This shops was part of several shops owned by the same person. I went back to one of his other shops and showed him the hat, the receipt, and asked if I could have a replacement. He was extremely snotty with me and said only if it was in PERFECT condition (which it is). Then I told him the price I'd paid for it and he said that I shouldn't have had a discount on it because the coupon wasn't valid for hats. He said that I would, if ordering another hat in a different size, have to pay the full price. I was a little annoyed by this: I used a coupon and didn't expect an extra charge for the right size. His tone was quite rude and I said that I'd bought the item in good faith, that it wasn't really my problem that the shop assistant had made a mistake and that he should honour the agreement, whereupon the owner told me that there was a no-returns policy, that I'd been snotty with him, and that I should go away!! (He also made little shooing motions with his hands in the direction of the door.) I couldn't believe it. Now I can't even get a refund - which I'd rather do at this stage, and buy the hat somewhere else.

Now, is he required to a) change the item, considering that his employee told me that I could and b) is he required to do so at the discounted price I paid for it?

I have a receipt which shows the amount I paid for it. (£32 rather than £40.)

I've spent far too much time already trying to talk to his employees, who are nice but a bit hopeless, and I have a hat that doesn't fit. What shall I do? It's now a matter of principle: I don't really feel like giving this person the extra £8.

[custardy]

well you have no rights to a refund
the voucher one is tricky
as it stands you have a credit for £32 and i dont know if you have any right for the voucher to be reused
the retailer doesn't actually have to offer an exchange so you could be on thin ice

[Dave101t]

jeweler: he gave you a written quote. quotes are final prices.
it could only go up if you were given a written estimate, which you agreed to.