Your consumer rights are changing, ask the Consumer Affairs Minister how

Former_MSE_Wendy · 16 March 2015 at 5:42PM

For almost two years the government has been working to simplify some of our consumer rights laws and bring them all into a new piece of legislation called the Consumer Rights Act 2015. This will eventually replace laws such as the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

What’s changing?

The new act will cover both goods and services as well as introducing a new category for digital content. It’ll also include rules on unfair contract terms and what businesses need to do if something’s gone wrong.

Key changes to the law include:

Goods: there will be a set 30-day period to return faulty goods (unless they’re perishable) and get a full refund. At the moment this has to be done in a ‘reasonable time’. You’ll also only have to accept one free repair or replacement before being entitled to a refund. If the fault still isn’t resolved you can get a partial refund, although the business can take a deduction based on how much you’ve used the goods.

Services: there’s a legal right for consumers to demand a service is re-done if it’s not carried out to a satisfactory level, or get a full or partial refund if it’s not redone properly. The current law doesn’t say these remedies have to take place, it’s down to a consumer to push for whatever they can get.

Digital Goods: consumers will be entitled to ask for a repair or replacement, or a full or partial refund. You’ll also be entitled to a repair or some compensation if the trader fails to use reasonable care and skill to stop the digital content damaging your equipment.

For more info on the changes see the BIS consumer rights bill website.

CONTINUED BELOW...

Former_MSE_Wendy · 18 March 2015 at 9:55AM

What do you want to ask the minister?

Post your questions below or you can ask via Twitter or by emailing [EMAIL="consumerrights@moneysavingexpert.com"]consumerrights@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

We're going to create a shortlist, which we will use to interview Jo Swinson sometime next week. We can't promise to use all your ideas but we can promise to read them.

Examples of things to include...

You can ask whatever you like but we’re hoping for questions about what the updated rights will mean.

Here are some of the questions that MSE might include on the list:

Some of the boundaries between goods, services, and now we have digital goods too, are a bit blurred. For example buying a CD-Rom (goods) which comes with a year's licence (a service) and downloadable software (digital content) could be all three. How do people tell which rights they're entitled to?
What do people do if the business doesn’t follow the new rules?
You’ve told us in the past the law can be just as hard for businesses to understand as it is for the consumer, how are businesses being educated about the updated rights?
If someone asks for a repair does the business have to do what it's asked?
Lots of MoneySavers have been told in the past to take their complaint to the manufacturer rather than the retailer, will this still be the case?
How long should a repair take?
Are the rules different for second hand goods?

Please don’t include questions about your personal consumer rights complaints as the minister is unlikely to be able to deal with individual cases.

PLEASE KEEP SUGGESTIONS TO AROUND 50 WORDS THOUGH FEEL FREE TO DO MORE THAN ONE

Purp1euk · 18 March 2015 at 12:10PM

The Minister is no doubt aware that many firms and customers do not fully understand what a consumer's "statutory rights" are in the UK. Yet there is no incentive for companies to learn. Does the Minister not feel that having a Consumer Ombudsman that citizens could turn to when a firm refuses to abide by the law is desperately needed?

The Sale of Goods Act is a really strong piece of consumer protection on paper, but it is only as strong in practice if it can be enforced and many customers are scared by the idea of taking a big company to court, meaning justice is denied. An Ombudsman would allow such systemic failure to be identified and remedied for the benefit of consumers.

unholyangel · 18 March 2015 at 2:34PM

In the initial drafts (of the above changes), it was stated that one reason for the change was to simplify them to make them easier to understand and also reduce training costs for retailers. What makes them think these changes will work when previously, many retailers have not bothered to train their staff in anything except company policy - leading to a complete disregard for consumer rights?

How extensive will the digital rights be in practice? For example if the initial "goods" are fine, but a later update by the developers causes bugs or crashes? Furthermore, was any consideration given to EULA's - which often have the effect of forcing consumers to agree to changes if they want to continue to use the service, content or even in some cases, hardware they have purchased? (Like xbox - if you dont agree, your several hundred pound gaming console becomes an expensive paperweight).

Also, according to the draft bill, if a retailer sells you digital content that is not as described, you would only be entitled to some money back. How does this offer consumers any real protection when they're effectively being forced to buy something that may not be what they actually purchased? Especially given that those industries seem to be moving towards digital downloads and away from physical copies.

Since they have defined a reasonable time for the acceptance period, has there been any attempts to define the reasonable time or significant inconvenience of remedy? If not, can it really be considered a strengthening of consumer rights given the current legislation is more generous than that?

Fosterdog · 18 March 2015 at 3:34PM

The service part worries me slightly.

Yes there are a lot of bad tradespeople out there but there are also bad customers, if a job has to be completed to the customers satisfaction but they are the type of person who is never satisfied then where does that leave their rights for a refund?

I work in computer repairs, if a customer brings me a computer for repair that is running slow and I recommend say a full factory wipe but they insist on keeping everything on there with me just doing maintainence work to make slight improvements. What then happens when the customer is unhappy that they still have a slow machine even though I have spent time working on it and done what was agreed. Can they keep coming back every few weeks for me to carry out free work or have a refund for the work I have already done?

bod1467 · 18 March 2015 at 3:51PM

I would presume you could still say No and they'd have to take court action to enforce their claim?

esuhl · 18 March 2015 at 4:07PM

unholyangel wrote: »

How extensive will the digital rights be in practice? For example if the initial "goods" are fine, but a later update by the developers causes bugs or crashes? Furthermore, was any consideration given to EULA's - which often have the effect of forcing consumers to agree to changes if they want to continue to use the service, content or even in some cases, hardware they have purchased? (Like xbox - if you dont agree, you're several hundred pound gaming console becomes an expensive paperweight).

I agree -- this area needs to be made more clear in law.

Wasn't it Sony's PS3 that was advertised as being capable of running Linux? A clear consumer contract term. But then, after piracy concerns, Sony disabled the components required to run Linux and refused to refund customers who were no longer able to use the product as it was originally advertised.

And what about people buying, say, computers or CD-ROMs where the licensing terms are only visible after opening the package or booting the PC. Are customers entitled to reject the licence terms and return the goods for a full refund?

Leo2020 · 18 March 2015 at 8:02PM

Although I can see how the 30 day return period would simplify things what happens if goods cant be tested fully until after 30 days? For example buying a lawn mower in winter - a time when you don't mow crass. Or baby items like a pram or bouncer - you would only be able to test so much and the fault might not be apparent until used with a baby - this would be a problem where people buy before the baby arrives (which nearly everyone does).

Are there new laws on how long to report something being miss-described? An example would be:

I bought a PC which could be upgraded to 4GB of RAM. Physically the PC could fit 4GB on the motherboard and after checking other specifications I was happy with what I had purchased. 13 months later I tried to upgrade the RAM, and although slots were available the BIOS (the motherboard's software) could not accept 4GB. I was offered a refund by the retailer. If this had been limited to a 30 day return period then I would have been stuck with a miss-described PC.

Esqui · 18 March 2015 at 10:10PM

My questions are mainly about the one repair-and-then-refund. Does this apply only to a single fault (i.e. one attempt to repair it), or would this cover two different faults? This could be quite costly for businesses. How will this be managed to ensure that retailers are not unduly disadvantaged? On a second fault, would the machine be required to be fully tested (potentially by sending to a repair centre) to confirm a fault? Where is the point at which the refund would be required to happen? What about where a machine goes away for repair, but no fault is found, or - for example -where a software fault is fixed by resetting?

Also, in the text of the draft bill:

The consumer would have the right to insist on a repair or replacement of the boots, however, if it would be disproportionately expensive for the trader to provide a replacement rather than a repair then the consumer must accept a repair (and vice versa).

So not really able to "insist" on replacement

Are there new laws on how long to report something being miss-described?

The wording on the BIS site no longer says "as described". It is replaced with "must meet the expectations of the consumer". The description, if I understand the wording, only comes into play if the description is the basis for the contract.

So in your example above, it appears you only have a claim if you bought the PC on the basis that it could be upgraded to 4GB. If you didn't care about upgrading, but 13 months later decided to upgrade and found it couldn't, you may not have a claim.

Leo2020 · 19 March 2015 at 8:37AM

Esqui wrote: »

The wording on the BIS site no longer says "as described". It is replaced with "must meet the expectations of the consumer". The description, if I understand the wording, only comes into play if the description is the basis for the contract.

So in your example above, it appears you only have a claim if you bought the PC on the basis that it could be upgraded to 4GB. If you didn't care about upgrading, but 13 months later decided to upgrade and found it couldn't, you may not have a claim.

But what a consumer expects might be completely different from the the product can do. Consumers sometimes have very strange ideas about what a product should be like - I know I used to work in customer service for the same guys as you.

I did intend to upgrade the RAM at some point but how could that be proved? Maybe I didn't intend to upgrade then had a change of mind - how can anyone prove either way.

When I get time I will have a read of the draft bill.

Esqui · 19 March 2015 at 9:22AM

I assume that will fall into the fuzzy, vague cloud that is "reasonable". A consumer could reasonably expect that their new PC would be able to go online and play videos. A consumer wouldn't reasonably expect it to make them a cup of tea.

Your consumer rights are changing, ask the Consumer Affairs Minister how

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free