Manufacturers Warranty - Ex Display Receipt

revolution_2

I recently bought a Logitech Mouse which retails for £79.99 on their website, I was lucky enough to pick one up from Comet for £20 just under three months ago - the mouse was boxed and unused in a bargain bin by the checkouts. Reading through the manual the mouse comes with a three year manufacturers warranty with either a) replacement or repair b) refund.

When paying for the mouse, the clerk said the only way she could reduce the mouse was to put it through as ex-display but assured me it was a new mouse - also, nothing on the mouse indicated ex-display, the mouse was new and unused, just the box was tatty.

Some plastic on the mouse has started to peel off, and I contacted Logitech who immediately knew of the problem and were quick to offer a replacement - as long as I could prove purchase by presenting my receipt. I emailed them my receipt which has the reduced price of the mouse and also a reason for the discount, ex-display.

They have now since refused to offer the replacement, instead offering me 50% discount on the RRP from their store (this mouse retails at it's cheapest for £45 from online retailers, so not so much of a good deal - considering I have already paid £20 for the defective mouse) - because the mouse is shown as ex-display on receipt - but it isn't. It was an end of line mouse for the store.

Regardless of whether the mouse is ex-display, or was brand new - I can hardly go back to Comet to issue me a new receipt. Are they in their rights to deny me a replacement for a defective mouse under the warranty, because the receipt says it is ex-display? - they were so close to sending a new mouse in the post!

The argument seems that because I bought the mouse so cheaply, It's not covered under warranty?

Does an ex-display product invalidate the Manufacturers Warranty?! (even though this product was not ex-display, just the damn receipt!)

Many Thanks for reading my story!

Meepster

Tale it back to Comet and get a replacement from them, or get them to send it away for repair. Your contract is with Comet NOT Logitech...

jd87

What is and what isn't covered by a warranty? If the item doesn't work at all before then yes it should be covered, but if it is something fairly superficial like a bit of plastic peeling is that really a big deal? If it was brand new and not very old then yes, but if it was ex-display then basically it is second-hand. The first owner/user was the shop because they took it out of the box first. So you're asking Logitech to replace a second-hand item because of a superficial problem.

I know it isn't ex-display but you have no way to prove this now, you shouldn't have let comet put that on the receipt at the time.

revolution_2

You don't think of it at the time - but I now realise how important it is to have the right discount on a receipt. The item was a sale item, not second hand, so should still have a valid warranty - if the receipt was discounted correctly!

Thanks for the advice - Comet will be my next stop.

Note: peeling plastic isn't only a superficial defect, you interact with the mouse using your hand - and what once was a nice rubbered texture has turned into the feeling of sunburnt skin peeling! Not a nice user experience, hence logitech were willing to replace it without me even asking - I just asked if this was a product problem.

yummymummy79

Warranties are limited to the T&Cs within them, so can vary from company to company. if they want to set conditions then they potentially can.

As has been mentioned, Comet are the legally responsible ones anyway so they are the ones you should really be dealing with (good luck with that:whistle::rolleyes:)

woody01

There is now ay Comet will replace it as it was a 'bargain bin' item.
At best, its the £20 back.

BTW....Logitech has THE BEST RMA/replacement procedures i have EVER come across.

jay2552

I bought an ex-display gas hob in August from Homebase. No faults just 'end of batch', on show but never connected. Had it fitted and did not work. Hoover Candy are responsible for 1st year warrantry.
They will nto replace as it is ex-display item and will repair it. I am still waiting for a repair solution and have been told it will be another 4 weeks to get parts. This will make it 4 months since purchase.
This is unreasonable and try cooking for a family without a hob.
Do I have a right to have it replaced as they have failed to repair it in a 'reasonable' timescale?

shaun_from_Africa

Hoover Candy are responsible for 1st year warrantry.

Let me guess, was it someone from Homebase who told you this, because it is bull....
It is the retailer (Homebase) who you purchased the hob from, and it is the retailer who is responsible for ensuring that the goods are are described and fir for purpose.

Provided that you can show that the hob was fitted in accordance with the instructions and by a registered gas-safe fitter, then you should go back to homebase, speak to a manager and remind them of their obligations under the sale of goods act.

isplumm

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Let me guess, was it someone from Homebase who told you this, because it is bull....
It is the retailer (Homebase) who you purchased the hob from, and it is the retailer who is responsible for ensuring that the goods are are described and fir for purpose.

Provided that you can show that the hob was fitted in accordance with the instructions and by a registered gas-safe fitter, then you should go back to homebase, speak to a manager and remind them of their obligations under the sale of goods act.

But their responsibilities are to repair, refund or replace - they have choosen repair - so I am not sure going to HB will make any difference? A consumer does have a limited time to inspect goods - but 4 months is way to long.

Mark

shaun_from_Africa

A consumer does have a limited time to inspect goods - but 4 months is way to long.

I agree with that, but we don't know how long after the purchase the fault was first reported to Homebase. All the OP stated was that they are still waiting for a repair, which implies that thie may already have been going on for a while.

The other point they brought up was the "reasonable time" comment.
This is what BERR have to say on this

Additional rights for consumers

Alternatively, consumers (see definition in
the "Introduction") can choose to request
instead:

P a repair or replacement.
The retailer can decline either of these if he
can show that they are disproportionately
costly in comparison with the alternative.
However, any remedy must also be
completed without significant
inconvenience to the consumer. If neither
repair nor replacement is realistically
possible, consumers can request instead:

P a partial or full refund, depending on
what is reasonable in the circumstances.
It may be the case that a full refund is not
the reasonable option because the
consumer will have enjoyed some benefit
from the goods before the problem
appeared. This needs to be taken into
account before a reasonable partial refund

can be assessed.

And personally, I think waiting 4 weeks (and possibly far longer) to have a usable cooker is a significant inconvienence.

neilmcl

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Let me guess, was it someone from Homebase who told you this, because it is bull....
It is the retailer (Homebase) who you purchased the hob from, and it is the retailer who is responsible for ensuring that the goods are are described and fir for purpose.

Provided that you can show that the hob was fitted in accordance with the instructions and by a registered gas-safe fitter, then you should go back to homebase, speak to a manager and remind them of their obligations under the sale of goods act.

Not quite right. The manufacturer is responsible for the manufacturer's warranty. The retailer has a legal obligation under the SOGA. 2 different things.