Please help!!! - Update

Miss_Ratty

To cut a long story short, I bought a bicycle from Halfords, which on its maiden voyage the brakes FELL OFF and I also fell off. I took it back, and wanted a refund, but they told me that they can just repair it and give me a safety certificate. I would like to point out that I had a safety certificate when they built that bike, and I never want to get on this thing again. The gears don't work, the paint was chipped etc., but the worst was the brakes, which was downright dangerous. I copied the Sale of Goods Act in my letter to them, which states that the consumer has the right to rescind the contract and get money back etc., and this was my response (excuse their rubbish grammar and spelling!):
Ref. 249598

Dear Ms. Foster

Thank you fro your email. I apologise for the delay in the response.

It si always disheartening to hear of situations where customers experience
additional inconvenience and feel let down. I would like to assure you that
Halfords endeavours to maintain a good relationship with it's customers and
will always seek to use responses as a way of improving customer service.

I would like to advise that all of your comments are duly noted. I assume
that you are aware that a refund is not a statutory right and if an
economical repair is obtainable then this will be our first course of
action. Whilst you are correct in saying that you are entitled to request a
refund, we are also entitled to refuse this request, if we believe the
matter may be resolved via other means. In this instance, a repair. If the
repair does not resolve the probelm then we will look at other ways of
resolving the issue.

I appreciate you taking the time to highlight this issue as it is only
through feedback that we are able to identify areas where we are falling
short of expectations and can redress them.

Please accept our apologies and be assured this matter is receiving our
full attention.




Where do I stand!!!??? The Act states I am entitled to a refund as I no longer require the product (I never want to see that thing again...the bruises are still sore!). I'm £120 out of pocket and stuck with something which when they repair, and I don't want!!!

Thanks so much for listening to my rant xxx

Consumer Direct have been in touch and advised me that I am correct and am entitled to a refund (and commented on my use of the legislation, which Halfords should have paid attention to!)

I'm taking the shoddy product back for a full refund....sweet! I'll see if I can post the bit in legislation at the bottom of my post.

emmell

My brother bought his little girl a bike from Halfords, when trying to ride without stabilisers she fell off and damaged the brake lever. He couldn't buy the part he needed anywhere, Halfords didn't stock the parts so the bike was rendered useless. Needless to say, her next bike came from a local independent bike shop that keeps all the spares needed and where nothing was too much trouble.
ML.

sandracarol

An Item bought new must be 'fit for purpose'
I don't think a bike without breaks falls into that category
It goes...........tick.
It stops................oh hang on, no it doesn't

Halfords haven't got a leg to stand on
though it may cost you a solicitors letter to get your refund.
actually there should be a basic letter online somewhere.............

I find a well worded letter, sent recorded delivery and cc'd to as many people higher up the chain as you can find, usually does the trick.

If they are still sniffy.
say you have no option but to sue them for the injuries received by you while using the faulty bike supplied by them.

A bit hardball, but always handy to have in reserve.
If it looks like you are going to be a perfectly polite and reasonable pain in the bum, who may in the long run cost them more to fend off they'll often refund you just to make you go away.

irishgirl62

take them to the small claims court you wont need a solictor to do that

Miss_Ratty

I think I may have to, small claims that is. I couldn't believe it, I work in a legal services background and was given the exact text of the Act to put in my letter and I still had a pee poor response. I only wish in hindsight (a wonderful thing) that I had taken photos of my bruises to add a bit of bulk to it. I just can't believe them, I seriously don't want another certificate of "safety" and it to be fixed, I want shot of it!!!

I have emailed Watchdog tonight, and will get around the other media peeps, even though they are only really interested if loads of people have had the same problem. Why are huge outlets the ruddy worst when it comes to this type of thing???

foxwales

Miss_Ratty wrote: »

I think I may have to, small claims that is. I couldn't believe it, I work in a legal services background and was given the exact text of the Act to put in my letter and I still had a pee poor response. I only wish in hindsight (a wonderful thing) that I had taken photos of my bruises to add a bit of bulk to it. I just can't believe them, I seriously don't want another certificate of "safety" and it to be fixed, I want shot of it!!!

I have emailed Watchdog tonight, and will get around the other media peeps, even though they are only really interested if loads of people have had the same problem. Why are huge outlets the ruddy worst when it comes to this type of thing???

So you purchased a bike with chips on the paint work?

You also received a safety certificate from Halfords.

How do you intend to prove that the breaks falling off are due to the wrongful construction of the bike versus being damaged by it's use?

If you took Halfords to court you would probably end up loosing the case because you have to provide sufficient evidence that the bike was either not fit for purpose or faulty.

Look at the evidence logically, your bike has chips in the paintwork, the breaks fell off and you had a safety certificate which confirms the bike met Halfords safety checks. It could quite easily be turned around to the fact that the bike has been damaged by you on using it hence the paint chips and due to the collision the breaks have fallen off and that you are now trying to get Halfords to rectify your accident at no cost to yourself.

Halfords have no obligation under the Sales of Goods Act to offer you a refund, they have ever right to attempt to repair and rectify the issues you have raised. If this is not done to your own expectations, then you need to raise this internally with Halfords Head office to get this resolved by submitting a detailed formal complaint.

Should you take this matter to court and you lose, you will be potentially liable for all Halfords legal costs.

So a word of advice, exhaust all avenues with Halfords first before you jump the gun.

Call Consumer Direct for some worthwile advice too, I think they will tell you the same.

sarahg1969

foxwales wrote: »

If you took Halfords to court you would probably end up loosing the case because you have to provide sufficient evidence that the bike was either not fit for purpose or faulty.

It's unlikely that Halfords would let it go that far. It's not in their interests, from a financial point of view to do so (wasting the time of their in-house legal dept and all that). I suspect a letter of claim would elicit the refund that the OP wants.

4743hudsonj

If your buying from halfords, its better to request an unbuilt model

the bike people their are often part timers, mostly untrained(may have some training but not enough) and are not provided with he correct equipment, i work a shop building bikes, an ex co worker who moved to halfords often mentions just how terrible the bikes are and they are made worse by the appalling assembly by the spotty little teenagers halfords hire for this very important and skilled (yes it does take skill to do correctly) task.

unless its camping equipment, avoid halfords like the plague

cant think of any worse rip off merchant out their, over priced goods and appalling quality and service.

Miss_Ratty

I thought it is not my responsibility to prove the bike was faulty on purchase, that it is Halfords who have to prove it wasn't? Its all very confusing. And the SOGA says the customer can rescind the contract if the item is no longer needed?

Nikiya

Call the Nº below and find out whether registering for Which? magazine legal service immediately entitles you to receive help with this matter (since the original problem would pre-date your membership).

http://www.whichlegalservice.co.uk/?gclid=CJmv_uy1vJsCFYUA4wod7Et7DQ

Good luck!

Miss_Ratty

Consumer Direct have been in touch and advised me that I am correct and am entitled to a refund (and commented on my use of the legislation, which Halfords should have paid attention to!)

I'm taking the shoddy product back for a full refund....sweet! I'll see if I can post the bit in legislation at the bottom of my post.


This is the legislative bit....

As such, I refer mainly to provisions within the Sale of Goods Act 1979, Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 when demanding a full refund on return of the bicycle to the store.

Key points to note from these provisions are:
• Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. This product was not.
• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description. This product was not.
• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety. This product was dangerous and unfit for purpose.
• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract. As such, I demand that Halfords on Newport Road Cardiff reimburse me.
• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back. I request my money back, as the product sold to me was in breach of contract.

For clarity, I have provided you with the actual legislative text below:

The Sale of Goods Act 1979, Part 2, Section 13, Subsection 1 states that “Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied term that the goods will correspond with the description.” Section 14 states that “Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality. For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances”. I consider myself to be a reasonable person, and I deem that the goods were not of satisfactory quality. Section 14 also states “For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—
a) fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,
b) appearance and finish,
c) freedom from minor defects,
d) safety, and
e) durability.

This Act also states, “the buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods when after the lapse of a reasonable time he retains the goods without intimating to the seller that he has rejected them”. Within a reasonable time, I have, on the basis of statute determined that the product is of unsatisfactory quality, and as such, I reject the “goods”, and expect a full refund at the very least when I return the bicycle to your store.

Under the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 (Chapter 35), I also quote again implied terms regarding quality, in which “goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.

Under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, (11P), I am also reserving my right to rescind (cancel) the contract with regards to this product. As stated in statute “The transferee may … rescind the contract with regard to those goods, as the transferee may require neither repair nor replacement of the goods. (3) If the transferee rescinds the contract, any reimbursement to the transferee may be reduced to take account of the use he has had of the goods since they were delivered to him”. I would like to reiterate that I had approximately ten minutes use out of the goods, which does not warrant any deduction from a product which should last in excess of five years. The law also states that I may “reject the goods and terminate the contract for breach of condition”, which is what I am doing. Rejecting the goods as Halfords has breached the contract of condition.