Is there any legislation against a retail company providing bad service?

daveedmo

PC World, I'm afraid.

I've been waiting for a replacement battery to be delivered from another branch. Been to the shop several times; been given the usual 'we'll find out where it is and call you', 'we need to wait till the salesman that ordered it comes in', 'it should be here tomorrow', etc.

Since then, I've tried calling - turns out you can't contact a shop directly; you can only call a central office who then, allegidly, request the shop call you.

- They've never called me once, even though I've been asked for my number by several staff members and the central office twice.
- I can't contact the shop directly, or even be put through to the shop by the central switchboard.
- There seems not to be a responsable person at any level. I cannot speak to a superior at central office, there's no obvious complaints procedure, etc.

As far as I'm aware, every time I visit a PC world shop, or call them centrally, they can promise anything then do nothing, with no recourse. The only option I seem to have is to ask for a refund for my laptop which would put me back to square one (not an option).

I can't understand why a company with such a large percentage share of the consumer electronic market in the UK can be allowed to give zero service. I understand why they do it (because they can get away with it) - they should not be allowed to though.

adam.mt

Not really; well, unless they break specific laws and trading guidelines.

Suggest you write to head office to complain; a letter to someone high up often gives the sufficient kick up the rear!
(just remember to be polite, clear, and give an indication of what you expect to happen - ie. get me my battery asap)

fthl

no, but services (that you pay for) must be delivered with reasonable skill and care and things that you buy must be delivered within a reasonable time, if that helps. Supply of Goods and Services Act and Sale of Goods Act respectively refer.

You might also be argue that any promises they make regarding good service, if not delivered, would be a breach of the cprs (a misleading omission that caused you to make a transactional decision) but frankly, this is a bit of a long shot.

Equaliser123

fthl wrote: »

no, but services (that you pay for) must be delivered with reasonable skill and care and things that you buy must be delivered within a reasonable time, if that helps. Supply of Goods and Services Act and Sale of Goods Act respectively refer.

You might also be argue that any promises they make regarding good service, if not delivered, would be a breach of the cprs (a misleading omission that caused you to make a transactional decision) but frankly, this is a bit of a long shot.

RUBBISH!

Goods have been bought. Not services. There is no implied warranty here.

cprs? What the heck is that?

fthl

with respect, we don't know, hence why I referred to both. I also tried to be clear - 'services (that you pay for)...'. I'd suggest the capitals were perhaps a little harsh, or that you didn't understand my post, for which I apologise. I'll try to be clearer in future.

Based on the facts it could be a repair contract in which case the SGSA might apply. I didn't mention warranties, but there will be lots of implied terms. If not, hence my reference to SOGA.

The CPRs - the consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, although I grant you there is no consumer right of action with these.

Equaliser123

fthl wrote: »

with respect, we don't know, hence why I referred to both. I also tried to be clear - 'services (that you pay for)...'. I'd suggest the capitals were perhaps a little harsh, or that you didn't understand my post, for which I apologise. I'll try to be clearer in future.

Based on the facts it could be a repair contract in which case the SGSA might apply. I didn't mention warranties, but there will be lots of implied terms. If not, hence my reference to SOGA.

The CPRs - the consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, although I grant you there is no consumer right of action with these.

PC World sell goods. Not services. The OP said they are awaiting a battery.

Reference to "CPRS" is really misleading.

fthl

PC world do repairs. a battery might be supplied as part of a repair. they have a whole counter that tries to sell services. http://www.thetechguys.com/

Why is mentioning the cprs misleading?

4743hudsonj

fthl wrote: »

PC world do repairs. a battery might be supplied as part of a repair. they have a whole counter that tries to sell services. http://www.thetechguys.com/

Why is mentioning the cprs misleading?

Its quite obvious that this isnt about a paid for service though, otherwise the op would just get a refund and go elsewhere.

Logically, its about some goods that require a new battery due to fault or recall yet it has not arrived meaning SOGA applies CPRS dont come anywhere near into this, you were very premature in mentioning it.

shadowknightz

I don't think there's a blanket law against them providing bad service, only specific laws such as the Sales of Goods act that prevent them from ripping us off with impunity. A letter to head office might speed up the battery being sent to you.

fthl

Its quite obvious that this isnt about a paid for service though, otherwise the op would just get a refund and go elsewhere.

I disagree. I agree it is likely, but not certain based on the facts presented. Hence the reason for my caveat in my original comment. As the two sets of rights under SGSA and SOGA are slightly different I maintain that it is wise to note the alternatives, if it is a possible situation.

Logically, its about some goods that require a new battery due to fault or recall yet it has not arrived meaning SOGA applies

Probably, but not certainly.

CPRS dont come anywhere near into this, you were very premature in mentioning it.

I disagree. I agree that it is a stretch, but I think they are potentially worth noting, with the caveat that it is an unlikely avenue.
"A commercial practice is a misleading action if... (a) if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful.. or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer... even if the information is factually correct; and... it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise."
Relevant factors are:
the need for a service, part, replacement or repair;
the consumer’s rights or the risks he may face.
availability of the product;
after-sale customer assistance concerning the product;
the handling of complaints about the product;
So the CPRs could be relevant, if the OP has allowed them to repair the goods (as opposed to enforcing some other right) based on misleading statements as to the availability of parts etc, or if they are not handling the complaint correctly.
Note - I have edited the above for conciseness - the full regs can be found here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/draft/ukdsi_9780110811574_en_1

Equaliser123

A "stretch" is putting it mildly. The OP is interested in getting his battery not going on a spurious crusade against PC World.