Faulty item must be exchanged, not refunded?

jetfighter

I bought a pair of trousers from Tesco and wore them the next day. When I got home, I realised that they had split at the seam down one of the legs, showing a weakness in the stitching.

I took them back to the shop and the lady on the till said that their policy states that they can only exchange faulty items, not refund them. She asked me if there was another pair of trousers in the same size. I told her that no, there wasn't (it was the last pair) and that anyway, I didn't think they were very well made so would prefer a refund to an exchange. She repeated that it's their policy to only exchange faulty items, not refund them, so asked me to choose something else from the clothing department.

Again I challenged this, stating that there was nothing else I wanted, and that the item was faulty, therefore I would like my money back. She went to her manager and then came back and said the manager had authorised a refund in this particular case.

What I want to know is: was I within my rights to demand a refund, or can they have a policy which allows them to only offer an exchange? I did get my refund, but would like to know for future reference, really.

WaveyDave_2

IANAL but I would be seeking a refund not replacement. Goods not fit for purpose.

Optimist

Yes, you are in your rights and no they cant have a policy that denies you your legal rights.

I doubt that Tescos actually do have such a policy more like poor training or the assistant just interpreting the policy incorrectly

For future reference refer them to the Sale of Goods Act

Bronnie

Optimist wrote: »

Yes, you are in your rights and no they cant have a policy that denies you your legal rights.

I doubt that Tescos actually do have such a policy more like poor training or the assistant just interpreting the policy incorrectly

For future reference refer them to the Sale of Goods Act

I think I would be inclined to disagree. I had the same experience with a Value toaster, which went Bang! a week after buying it. The woman at Customer Services repeated exactly the same mantra to me as in the case of the OP. I gently and politely challenged this fact ( actually I was quite prepared to exchange the item for a better brand and pay the difference but I was fairly incensed that Customer Services could spout this stuff at me quite categorically and try to get away with it. )
I was very polite and calm and mentioned the not fit for purpose bit,but the assistant was getting quite irate and stressed and kept banging away with the same line. In the end I asked her please could it be referred to someone more senior. She walked away from the counter, leaving a huge queue of customers waiting and came back having spoken to the Manager and offering my statutory rights 'on this occasion'.

I don't blame the assistant. I believe this is the line they are told to try first. She was quite stressed by this encounter, even though I was extremely polite. It should not be part of her duty to do the dirty work for Tesco.

jetfighter

Thanks everyone. This makes me feel better! :rolleyes: I was worried I was unnecessarily "rude". I wasn't actually aggressive or anything; I just hate confrontation!

A few years ago, I would've just accepted what she said as the truth and not challenged it, and I bet plenty of other people do that still. :mad: I can think of a few people I know who would definitely not have challenged it.

Tozer

The product is not of satisfactory quality within the meaning of section 14(2) Sale of Goods Act 1979. You are entitled to a refund.

Sukatoko

Well done! Polite and firm!

Blacksheep1979

Actually, if you have accepted the goods then the shop is well within its rights to offer a replacement or a repair - now how long as to when the goods are 'accepted' is open to interpretation - in the op's case she probably hasn't but after a week or two the shop would legally be allowed to offer a repair/replacement.

mustrum_ridcully

Tozer wrote: »

The product is not of satisfactory quality within the meaning of section 14(2) Sale of Goods Act 1979. You are entitled to a refund.

Yes and no... the reasonable period of time bit is important.

To quote the BERR website "If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)"

From their FAQ "Q4. I know I can demand my money back within a "reasonable time" but how long is that?
The law does not specify a precise time as it will vary for most sales contracts as all the factors need to be taken into account to be fair to all sides. The pair of everyday shoes may only have a few days before the period expires but a pair of skis, purchased in a Summer Sale, may be allowed a longer period by a court."

Yes I'd say the OP is entitled to a refund after only one day (assuming they have proof of purchase that wasn't mentioned in the post).

black_paw

i had no touble with tesco , i had phone that didnt hold the charge after 4 months got full refund , and most helpful

Tozer

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

Yes and no... the reasonable period of time bit is important.

To quote the BERR website "If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)"

From their FAQ "Q4. I know I can demand my money back within a "reasonable time" but how long is that?
The law does not specify a precise time as it will vary for most sales contracts as all the factors need to be taken into account to be fair to all sides. The pair of everyday shoes may only have a few days before the period expires but a pair of skis, purchased in a Summer Sale, may be allowed a longer period by a court."

Yes I'd say the OP is entitled to a refund after only one day (assuming they have proof of purchase that wasn't mentioned in the post).

The OP clearly states that it was the following day that the defect occurred.