Warranty help please

Daytona_nev

djpleasure wrote: »

Initially I was not getting involved with the debate side of this thread, but now I change my mind, especially after the last post highlighted above.

Everything you state is not realsitic, it is just pure negative annd unhelpful, this may lead to some just giving up without so much as a minor fight.
The last emssage is just works on assumptions and as you put it...chances are! To correct you.....the item was purchased as buy it now and BNIB, the seller sells constantly new i.t equipment. The above also insults my intelligence, like I cannot differentiate between a new mouse and a hardly used one. Especially as the box seal was intact, if the seller was like that, I am sure he would not have 100% feedback either.

You can not work on assumptions, also being competely negative is not helpful at all, even though YOUR thoughts are it is realistic.

In the past I have been very successful in regards to getting refunds, replacements etc, even when the situation is not straight forward, quite often the case is dealt with out of good old goodwill.

I would appreciate in future if you just do not bother offering me advice as I feel it is somewhat tainted, however I appreciate the other help I have received.

Fine. Fill your boots.

If you don't feel my comments are realistic then that's your prerogative.

Doesn't mean they're any less valid just because it isn't what you want to hear.

Though, I am genuinely interested in how you get on.

Daytona_nev

baddiebasher wrote: »

2. the rest of it. Try reading Sale of Goods Act, Consumer Protection Act and Regulations and Orders under the Acts as well as case law involved, and then come back and ask me what it has to do with it.

I'm already very familiar with the above.

Are you? Which parts apply in this case?

baddiebasher

That depends on the problem.

And I see no need to justify myself to you or anyone else.

End of.

Daytona_nev

baddiebasher wrote: »

That depends on the problem.

And I see no need to justify myself to you or anyone else.

End of.

Hmmm,

Course you don't.

"I am qualified in consumer related matters"

Yet you won't qualify your 'qualification'.

Work in a shop once did you?

baddiebasher

No - went to university for 3 years and got a good classification in a degree that is considered one of the most difficult in relation to consumer law.

Cease your pointless and childish bickering.

And why someone has thanked for a "useful post" is beyond me - there is nothing useful about your post whatsoever.

Debt_Free_Chick

djpleasure wrote: »

In the past I have been very successful in regards to getting refunds, replacements etc, even when the situation is not straight forward, quite often the case is dealt with out of good old goodwill.

I think the problem here will be that the seller is not a retailer and ebay sales are no different to buying something out of the classifieds ad in the local paper or a car boot sale! For that reason, I don't think you get the SOGA protection. And Logitech are stating that - contractually - the warranty belongs to the person who originally bought the item and not any subsequent buyer/owner.

Why not try Logitech again and say that the mouse was a gift?

djpleasure

This is what I found through a search:

DSR's do not apply to real world auctions however, trading standards and the DTI do NOT class eBay as auctions regardless of it being called an online auction. Therefore if you are a business you are liable to abide by DSR's and ensure you are running your business legally. Visit the eBay for business guide
The DSR's do not apply to private sellers, so for those of you that sell unwanted items as opposed to buying to sell you are not legally obliged to abide by the DSR's. You do not have to offer returns or a 7 day cooling off period
As a private seller you need to decide whether you wish to offer returns and/or exchanges
Trading Standards are well aware of eBay and the business legalities