Argos & Ipod Mini

stugib

Stiltskin wrote:

Yes it does seem a little fuzzy. However as I've only been able to test it over a month, I would argue that I haven't taken an unreasonable amount of time to examine it. Also sending it off to repair is inconvinent to me I've already been unable to use it properly since starting to use it I just want something I can use.

I think they'd try to claim a month is enough to inspect them and check it works. If you look at the shoes and skis examples the DTI gives, you get longer to inspect the skis because you have to wait until it snows to see if they work/good enough quality etc.

I think you are onto your best approach in saying you have only just had time to inspect it because of your absence, but again it's difficult to prove (maybe you could take your plane tickets with you )

Have Argos given you an estimate of how long it will take to repair? 2 months does sound unreasonable (i.e. causes you unnecessary inconvenience) if that's what they've said. If you do go the repair route, I'd recommend putting a fair time limit on it in writing (2 weeks?). If the law doesn't want to put concrete times down, then you might as well try to! Actually, IIRC there may be a 4 week limit on repairs? I'll have to look...

homer_j_3

I would call apple direct they have a good customer service record as far as I can see and will know more about these issues than argos will. It may be a firmware issue or something so a replacement may not be an option if it can be fixed cheaply and efficiently.

I am an avid mac user and know people that have had laptops that have been outside warranty but they have still offered free help in fixing etc. I know that may sound like a suprise in todays world.

The worst they can say is no or no to a replacement but will send you a box to send to them for them to fix and return. so I would go to them and see what they have to say.

executiverocker

there has been a big push inside argos about sending ipods for repairs, much like what happens if you have a faulty ps2, they ring up the manufacterer etc.

Stiltskin_2

just been in to speak to the store manager. Gave him a letter outlining why I was rejecting the goods, that a repair would be inconvinent and I would like a replacement or failing that a refund.
After much toing and froing between me and a phone he said - Argos policy is to send it off to be examined to see if can be repaired. This will take 16 days. If it can be repaired after it has been examined then it will be (no idea how long this will take though) if not they will replace it. However they can't replace it as they no longer stock them, so it will then go to the third line of their policy - they will offer a refund which will not be in cash but in Argos Gift Vouchers.

He also stated that he knew that going down this route would be inconvinent to me.

I asked him to place all of that in writing to ensure I understood it. He went off and came back 15 minutes later saying he had spoken to the area manager and they said he shouldn't put anything in writing!

I think I need to talk to Trading Standards.

stugib

Stiltskin wrote:

If it can be repaired after it has been examined then it will be (no idea how long this will take though) if not they will replace it. However they can't replace it as they no longer stock them, so it will then go to the third line of their policy - they will offer a refund which will not be in cash but in Argos Gift Vouchers.

Hmmm, not good. I can't find anything definitive on credit notes in case of repair/replacement. DTI says:

Must I accept a credit note instead of a refund?
It depends on why you want to return the goods.
• If you have changed your mind, then the shop doesn't have to do anything.
• But if the goods are faulty, incorrectly described or not fit for purpose, then you are entitled to your money back (provided you act quickly), and you certainly don't have to take a credit note
• If you do accept a credit note in these circumstances, watch out, as there may be restrictions on their use.

Neither repair nor replacement of the goods are possible. What can I do?
You may either pursue the old route of damages or a partial or full refund. Probably either would give you exactly the same amount of money. You would seek a full refund in scenarios such as those where you had enjoyed absolutely no benefit from the goods. If you had benefited from them then you would seek a partial refund as a fair remedy. This is exactly the reasoning that would be employed if you sought damages.

I suppose if it came down to purely legal terms, they could offer you a partial refund in cash, and at the moment they're (soon) offering a full refund in vouchers. What would be be better for you? Do they sell something you'd be happy with as a replacement? How far off is the cost of what you'd accept as an alternative model?

Stiltskin wrote:

He also stated that he knew that going down this route would be inconvinent to me.

I asked him to place all of that in writing to ensure I understood it. He went off and came back 15 minutes later saying he had spoken to the area manager and they said he shouldn't put anything in writing!

I think I need to talk to Trading Standards.

I suppose at least they're recognising they're in a legal situation now and aren't fobbing you off with their own rules/guarantees. And he's admitted that he's putting you to some inconvenience (though he'd probably deny saying that).

Think you are better talking to TS now - are you in a ConsumerDirect area? They're very good IME. If I'm reading it right, you are entitled to claim damages (i.e. get it repaired yourself and claim costs), but the risk of losing given that they are offering to repair it, and time involved in suing them for the costs probably outweigh the time involved in them repairing it, given you just want a working player ASAP.

Never easy is it? Let us know what TS advise.

Stiltskin_2

TS advise sending a letter to their head office. They say I am entitled to a replacement or a full refund as I have not been able to benefit from the item and I don't have to accept a repair. So I'll send that off today and give them 7 days to reply. I've got a case number now, so I can refer it back if need be.

I think the thing that is annoying me most is that they know they are breaking the law and that they think they can get away with it.

stugib

Interesting. That's the first time I've heard that 'lack of benefit' explanation, but it makes sense in explaining both the shoes and the skis examples they give online. Good luck with it anyway - hopefully Argos'll shape up when you drop TS into the conversation, though part of me wishes someone would take it all the way just to get it decided one way or the other for people in the same situation in future.

Stiltskin_2

Just to follow up on this, after 10 days I've still not heard anything and with the help of those nice people at Consumer Direct/Trading Standards I've drafted a second letter to them. Let's see if they even bother to reply to this one.

Stiltskin_2

Sorry for another posting...however I need to vent after getting a call from the Store manager of the branch. I'd cc'd him in to the copy I sent to Head Office as directed by Trading Standards.

Anyway, he phoned me on Saturday whilst I was on my way to South Wales for a wedding. The first thing he said to me was the reason I didn't get a reply to my first letter was I'd sent it to the wrond address. I had sent the letter to their head office address in Milton Keynes. When I was in the store I asked the store manager (of the day) for a copy of this address when he refused me a replacement or refund. Apparently their customer service department is elsewhere in the country?!? I mentioned that his store gave me the address, and anyway they had signed for the letter 12 days previously and I'm sure it would have ended up in the right place anyway.

He then said I'd have to have the iPod sent off to prove it was faulty. I pointed out I'd brought it into his shop twice and they'd seen it and agreed it was faulty. He then went on to say it would have to be sent off to ensure it hadn't broken because I'd dropped it or something similar. In the same sentence he said he was aware I'd quoted the sale of goods act in my letter, however they (Argos) have a company policy that was written by lawyers. They just have to follow this, and could ignore what was written in the sale of goods act. This would mean the item would have to be sent off of 16 days to be assessed. He then mentioned Argos have lots of lawyers working for them, which I felt alluded to a threat that I couldn't win a court case against them.

Obviously at this point I was rather angry, however I kept my tongue and suggested that they should place all this in writing. I guess I'll have to wait and see if they do. But I'm still rather angry at the way I was accused of first, I was making up that there is a fault and second that I caused the fault. I'm also angry at the way he'd implied that their policy superceeds the sale of goods act and that I'd loose any legal action as they have loads of lawyers who know the law better than me and Trading Standards....aghhh....

hjb123

So what is happening now - are you having it sent off?