Blacks the outdoor shop refuse refund on faulty goods!

gundo

I have a pair of faulty Trekmate Short Gaiters. I purchased them at Blacks on the 8 March 2010. I've recently joined the Ramblers and I've used them on 4 occasions. After a 6 mile walk I did this morning (14 April 2010) I noticed that one rivet holding the shoelace hook had failed on one of the gaiters (the rivet had gone completely and fallen out).

I returned them this afternoon (14.4.2010) to the shop where they were originally purchased with my original receipt (i.e. my proof of purchase).

They refused to give me a refund but did offer an exchange. I didn't want an exchange but a refund.

They said that all "branded" goods have to be returned to the manufacturer for the manufacturer to confirm that the goods were faulty before they would give me an exchange. I said this was unacceptable, that my contract was with Blacks not the manufacturers and that getting a successful claim under the manufacturers warranty wasn't my problem but their's. They still refused me a refund. I left the store with a receipt for the returned goods, having given them details of my name, address and contact number. I advised them that I would be contacting my local Trading Standards to complain that they were in breach of the Sale of Goods Act but still no joy.

Did I do the right things? I'm assuming that I'm in the right and that I am due a refund if I want?

Just in case it's not clear, I wasn't very happy with their response at all. In fact I'm livid but I kept my temper and didn't swear but I did get quite stroppy (I didn't think I was being unreasonable asking for a refund for faulty goods). It's annoying that I had to make so much fuss for the sake of £15 pair of gaiters. For all the stress it's caused I wish I'd just chucked them in the bin! However I can't believe that they're being so obstructive for the sake of £15 and obviously I shan't making any more purchases there, which is a shame as they have some nice stuff.

wealdroam

You are only entitled to either a refund, repair or replacement.

You get to choose which, but the retailer can refuse your choice if he would prefer one of the other options.

So, in this case, you have been offered a replacement. That is probably all you can expect.

What is wrong with a replacement?

gundo

wealdroam wrote: »

You are only entitled to either a refund, repair or replacement.

Not according to CAB

"If you think you are entitled to a full refund but the trader offers you one of these alternatives instead, you may want to think about accepting it, but you don't have to."

I don't want another pair the same as these ones, since they only lasted 4 walks I suspect another pair will do the same. BTW that's 4 walks in English countryside not extreme trekking in the Himalayas...

The gaiters are basically just for stopping the bottom of your trousers getting muddy.

wealdroam

Maybe you could agree with the retailer to exchange your faulty goods for a different brand.

wealdroam

This document will explain what your entitlements are.

drsquirrel

What is wrong with a replacement though? Surely you wanted the item in the first place?

As for SoGA, because it's under 6 months they need to prove they are not faulty, and to check this either way it seems they want the manufacturer to check - this is entirely reasonable (although it should be independent, and i'm not sure if that is of the manufacturer or retailer).

Still - I think you should have just taken the replacement... at least if it goes faulty again you have that in hand...

I have to say though - I would expect to get more muddy around the English country side than on the plains of the Himalayas

Dick_Van_Dyke

gundo wrote: »

Not according to CAB

"If you think you are entitled to a full refund but the trader offers you one of these alternatives instead, you may want to think about accepting it, but you don't have to."

I don't want another pair the same as these ones, since they only lasted 4 walks I suspect another pair will do the same. BTW that's 4 walks in English countryside not extreme trekking in the Himalayas...

The gaiters are basically just for stopping the bottom of your trousers getting muddy.

Yes but if you dont agree with the retailer you have to enforce it through the courts.
The judge will then decide on reasonableness whose stance is correct. Expecting a full refund for boots used 6 times to hike in a month imo isnt clear cut and the exchange is likely within the SOGA.

Optimist

gundo wrote: »

Not according to CAB

"If you think you are entitled to a full refund but the trader offers you one of these alternatives instead, you may want to think about accepting it, but you don't have to."

I don't want another pair the same as these ones, since they only lasted 4 walks I suspect another pair will do the same. BTW that's 4 walks in English countryside not extreme trekking in the Himalayas...

The gaiters are basically just for stopping the bottom of your trousers getting muddy.

Cab are right up to a point. Section 13 of SOGA is a condition and as such gives you the right to a refund but it is time limited.

The stores argument would be that you have had the item over 30 days so that right has gone and you are entitled to repair replacement or refund at the stores discretion.

It would need a judge to decide and if you feel strongly enough then you should write to the store giving them 14 days to respond or you will take them to court which seems a little extreme

real1314

Optimist wrote: »

Cab are right up to a point. Section 13 of SOGA is a condition and as such gives you the right to a refund but it is time limited.

The stores argument would be that you have had the item over 30 days so that right has gone and you are entitled to repair replacement or refund at the stores discretion.

It would need a judge to decide and if you feel strongly enough then you should write to the store giving them 14 days to respond or you will take them to court which seems a little extreme

Perhaps the OP would have success, if it came to court, on the baiss that the item was inevtiably one that would only be used occasionally and therefore a 30-day return period was not sufficient to test the durability of the item.
This is often the problem with goods thesedays - the potential to test to any degree that is valid must therefore be a consideration in the opportunity to reject goods.

ALIBOBSY

The Soga should not have any one section read in isolation.
It also states that any goods must be fit for the purpose for which they are sold and must last a reasonable length of time. Section 14 of the SOGA would be more appropriate in this situation. Section 13 normally ony applies to good sold by description only ie distance selling.
Unfortunately many shops hide behind other sections of the law or muddy the waters with warrantees and their own "company policy", non of which over rule your basic legal rights.

The CAG forum have a great summary of all the legal aspects of the act, plus full links to the act itself and also quote some of the relavent legal decisions if you pop over there.
But the biggest thing that may decide what you do next is the actaul cost and what you want the outcome to be. I assume you want some walking boots/shoes just not these, I am sure they would be amenable to an exchange against a different brand. A manager made even be able to negotiate down any price difference in the name of good customer service.

This may be the easiest route to take. But if all else fails thats what the small claims court is for (but you must be clear on the laws you are using and give them written notice of your intent to sue-this gives them a chance to negotiate/settle).

In alot of cases the best way forward is to contact head office or someone much higher up than the average joe on the counter.

Whatever you decide good luck

ali x

jdturk

I'm thinking that to be honest they wouldn't want your custom if you're going to be stroppy to customers who have dealt with the situation in the correct way. And as for obstruction over £15 shoes....pot, kettle black!