How to progress "unfit for purpose" claim when seller refuses

Equaliser123

4743hudsonj wrote: »

The seems more like "free from minor defect" claim

after all they play music..........

Totally agree. Fitness for purpose should pretty much always be a secondary claim. The requirement for an item to be of satisfactory quality (including as you rightly say the freedom from minor defects requirement) is much stronger.

Equaliser123

pendulum wrote: »

That's a really good example of how not to communicate with a seller. I was on your side until I heard how you began communicating.

to be fair, the seller has not exactly covered themselves in glory either.

chrisp030271

Update.

I sent a recorded delivery letter addressed to the manager of the company - using a template downloaded from the ConsumerDirect-dot-gov-dot-uk website (sorry it won't let me post a link as a newbie).

Based on the advice received on this forum, I cited "unsatisfactory quality".

I received a very prompt reply by email (not from the cooperative "Ben") saying that they could not offer a refund as I had had them for longer than 7 days, but "as a one-off goodwill gesture" they would replace with an alternative product of a similar value.

As far as I am concerned, that is a good enough result - I had no wish to go to small claims just to make a point. I chose an alternative pair, sent the original naff ones back, and have received their replacement today (they are *much* better).

Many thanks to those who gave *constructive* comments. No thanks to the individual who just wanted to have a pointlesss pop without offering any advice - why are you on these forums?

dEfEndEr_2

At least:

a) the company resolved the issue
b) the company responded in a timely manor.

rsykes2000

dEfEndEr wrote: »

At least:

a) the company resolved the issue
b) the company responded in a timely manor.

'Manner'. Apart from that, I agree with you.

pendulum

chrisp030271 wrote: »

No thanks to the individual who just wanted to have a pointlesss pop without offering any advice

The hint I tried to give off in post #10 was that your emails came across as being written by someone "with attitude" and they were also unnecessarily "legally aggressive". If you had communicated in a normal and friendly way to begin with, instead of getting their backs up by quoting legal phrases and putting such a bad tone to your emails, then I am sure you would have been successful sooner. It's no surprise to me that it was a template letter written by someone else that eventually brought you success, rather than any of your own communications!

chrisp030271

pendulum wrote: »

The hint I tried to give off in post #10 was that your emails came across as being written by someone "with attitude" and they were also unnecessarily "legally aggressive". If you had communicated in a normal and friendly way to begin with, instead of getting their backs up by quoting legal phrases and putting such a bad tone to your emails, then I am sure you would have been successful sooner. It's no surprise to me that it was a template letter written by someone else that eventually brought you success, rather than any of your own communications!

:beer:
I see I had to bait you to get an explanation to your original post - your commentary above is what I was genuinely interested in. I don't do this thing very often (complain) so am certainly no expert. However I would like to know (genuinely) what people think was wrong with my original message to the company (below), which seems to be what caused you such consternation when you said "I was on your side until I heard how you began communicating.". How would the consumer rights experts out there have worded their opening communication?

I accept I got a tad sarcastic as the dialogue progressed, but hey, they got my back up and I was having a bad day :mad:. Their guy just kept repeating the "Are they faulty?" question, which as they technically weren't I presumed was his attempt to try to wriggle out of the situation - maybe I read him wrong (though based on his "my poor Dad works for the CAB and people like you waste his time" comment, I suspect not).

In my defence, there is little difference to the content of the templated letter (which incidently leads with "Sales of Goods Act 1979 bla bla bla") and what I initially emailed to them:

Opening message to company
I would like to return these headphones (V-Moda Vibe II) and either receive a refund, or replacement with another brand / model (happy to receive your recommendation for alternative iPhone headphones).
These headphones are not fit for purpose due to the cloth covering on the wires - when the wires rub against your collar or any other part of your clothing, the cloth covering picks up and amplifies the sound straight into your ear, delivering a near-constant scratching which ruins all reasonable attempts at use.
Please advise, thank you.
Mr C M Phillips.