Consumer Rights: MoneySavingExpert.com discussion

deanos

Art wrote: »

It seems unlikely that the fault is inherent unless you can turn up other purchasers who have had the same problem.

IMO it's down to you to have repaired at your expense.

Regards,
Art.

Didn't realise you had you find other that have had the same problem to claim under the SOGA ?

Surely its worth a shot getting a report rather than giving in.

Art_2

If you can find others with the same problem this could be accepted as indicative of an inherent fault.

Also bear in mind a report has to be presented by an independent expert acceptable to both sides. I doubt if 'The lovely little man in my local repair shop' would qualify.

County Courts should have a list of acceptable experts.

Regards,
Art.

Googlewhacker

Art wrote: »

If you can find others with the same problem this could be accepted as indicative of an inherent fault.

Also bear in mind a report has to be presented by an independent expert acceptable to both sides. I doubt if 'The lovely little man in my local repair shop' would qualify.

County Courts should have a list of acceptable experts.

Regards,
Art.

Maybe, but finding other people doesn't denote an inherent fault in itself, it would when the number of people with the same problem reach a certain percentage would it be a problem

CDB_2

Do you have to prove an inherent fault? Can't you claim under durability that a product should last longer than it has, so even if the fault appeared say a year out of warranty you should be able to claim? For example I suppose a common one would be an LCD TV panel paking up after 2 years. A random non inherent fault could render your £500-£2000 tv useless. I would expect it to last a damn site longer an not be out of pocket because I couldn't prove it was an inherent fault.

Surely any inherent fault would mean the item would be faulty when you bought it? It couldn't just appear 14months later and be inherent as it wasn't there before because the item was obviously working?

unlucky13

Can anyone give me some advice please? I went to buy my daughters first school shoes yesterday afternoon at a local independent shoe shop as she has very wide feet and can't even fit Clarks shoes. She was measured as a 10.5G in start rite shoes, and as we were there I asked them to check the sizing of her trainers that she was wearing at the time (Geox size 28). I was told that the trainers were stunting her toes and as such I asked them to bring out some trainers (also Geox) and they fitted the pair she wanted. Both pairs came to £76. Anyway, later on in the evening she wanted to show her dad so we got them both out and I noticed that the Geox were a size 28, the same size she had been wearing! Also, the start rite were in a 10.5G box, but are an 11H.
The shop has a notice up saying no refunds or exchanges without a manufacturing fault, and I have heard of them being difficult with people in the past. Can anyone tell me what my rights are? I can't believe they have sold me the same size Geox, and now I'm not even sure the school shoes were fitted properly.
I'm not well off, this is a weeks wages for me and I'm freaking out. I was planning to go back when they open tomorrow and be very nice but I wanted some back up. Sorry for the long post, any help gratefully received.

deanos

Maybe go to Clarks and get here measured before you go back to the shop, they usually jot it down on apiece of Clarks headed paper don't they

unlucky13

Thanks for the speedy reply, I think I was a bit unclear, do you know what my rights are with regard to a refund or exchange? Thanks

deanos

Im not sure on that front, but just thought if you went to Clarks you would have proof they were missold to you as they are the wrong size.

Im sure someone will be along soon with a good answer

Art_2

CDB wrote: »

Do you have to prove an inherent fault? Can't you claim under durability that a product should last longer than it has, so even if the fault appeared say a year out of warranty you should be able to claim? For example I suppose a common one would be an LCD TV panel paking up after 2 years. A random non inherent fault could render your £500-£2000 tv useless. I would expect it to last a damn site longer an not be out of pocket because I couldn't prove it was an inherent fault.

Surely any inherent fault would mean the item would be faulty when you bought it? It couldn't just appear 14months later and be inherent as it wasn't there before because the item was obviously working?

If you are claiming an inherent fault you obviously have to prove it. It could be a component that is known to breakdown after use for example. ( braking problems on cars recently comes to mind) Generally you would need an expert to help you on this and that is why courts would look for a report.

You have up to 6 years to make a complaint about a faulty item. The courts will take into account reasonability and durability. If you buy a washing machine at the same time as your neighbour and your one breaks down after say 3 years whilst your neighbours carries on working you may have a claim - but you may not. If you have been using your one three times a day, every day, then a court would take this into account when assessing your claim. They would also take into account the price of the machine and may decide you have had reasonable use from your machine.

gill5blue

Hi
I think (hoping) this will be a simple answer?
I bought a telly for the caravan 6 weeks ago and now it does not recieve any signals. I bought this from Maplins.
It has freeview included (but now does not work), and we checked at the check out that it has freeview and interestingly the shop assistant muttered under her breath that if there were any problems to send it back to the manufacturer??, which I thought was a bit strange.
Am I correct that if it is under one year, the shop should solve any problems?
Cheers for any answers
gill5blue