Am I being reasonable?

Peter_Friswell

neilmcl wrote: »

I Also if you really want them to take you seriously I would stop quoting the EC directtive at them as if you know what you were talking about and refer to the Sale of Goods Act 1979 instead.

It seem to be my month for problems!
1/ A recurrent problem with a good quality laptop that was out of manufacturers warranty - Manufacturers pointed me at retailer because of EC Directive and I got a full refund of £275 on Thursday
2/ Problem with the fixings on a towel ladder radiator sold by B&Q to me about 18 months ago. Tried to fob me off until I pointed out that according to EC rules they had a two year responsibility. Hey presto new fixings given to me.

Why would Comet and B&Q do that unless they had concerns?

Blacksheep1979

Peter_Friswell wrote: »

Just checked on SOGA and found this
"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."

People on here are reasonable and 78% think it should last longer than 18 months

Yes it does say that (although I wouldn't necessarily take people on here to be average for the whole population) however if you continue to read on it also says that up to 6 months it is up to the retailer to prove that it's not an inherant fault, after 6 months it is up to you the buyer to prove there was a fault in the product at the point of purchase. This normally involves a report by an independent expert, not a load of randoms off an internet forum.

Peter_Friswell

Anihilator wrote: »

Did Bathstore fit the mirror?

If not they are well in their rights to get a report or proof of the faults. I wonder where you will get someone to state that it was installed properly in the first place and was inherently faulty.

The OP can serve them for a MCOL case but he is not going to automatically win. There is some burden of proof.

It's a DIY mirror and I'll take it to court to show.

Forgive my lack of knowledge but does "OP" and "MCOL" mean?

neilmcl

Peter_Friswell wrote: »

It seem to be my month for problems!
1/ A recurrent problem with a good quality laptop that was out of manufacturers warranty - Manufacturers pointed me at retailer because of EC Directive and I got a full refund of £275 on Thursday
2/ Problem with the fixings on a towel ladder radiator sold by B&Q to me about 18 months ago. Tried to fob me off until I pointed out that according to EC rules they had a two year responsibility. Hey presto new fixings given to me.

Why would Comet and B&Q do that unless they had concerns?

Because they were aware of their legal responsibilities under the SOGA, trust me the EC directive wouldn't have come into it.

OlliesDad

neilmcl wrote: »

Because they were aware of their legal responsibilities under the SOGA, trust me the EC directive wouldn't have come into it.

Also staff tend to be equally naive of the laws so will replace out of fear.

Although on the first of the scenarios they could have given a partial refund instead of a full one.

simpywimpy

I think they would argue that there is no way they could assess the amount of steam/condensation in your particular bathroom and that some bathrooms have excessive amounts that are over and above what the mirror is made to withstand.

pendulum

My feeling is that a court win is far from certain, it could be down to you to prove that the item was inherently faulty and wasn't damaged by poor environmental conditions such as excessive steam for prolonged periods. In addition they have already compromised by giving you 50% off a new mirror so they have tabled an offer which a court could see as reasonable, so... if it was me I just wouldn't be happy taking it to court and I'd likely accept their offer.

Peter_Friswell

pendulum wrote: »

My feeling is that a court win is far from certain

I agree; but that cuts both ways and my maximum exposure is £30

pendulum

But you risk them withdrawing the offer of 50% off as well, and if it does go to court you could have other costs which you wouldn't get back.
I'd just think about it that's all.

Peter_Friswell

pendulum wrote: »

But you risk them withdrawing the offer of 50% off as well,

Yes I agree there is always that possibility

pendulum wrote: »

and if it does go to court you could have other costs which you wouldn't get back.

What other costs do you have in mind?