Consumer Rights: MSE Article discussion (DO NOT ASK CONSUMER QUESTIONS HERE)

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hiya

We only close threads that are linked to from articles if we're starting a new thread eg when the article's been fully updated or had a complete re-write so it's fine to leave this one open.

Thanks for that!

Andrea

squeaky

Hi jump82,

I've moved your question into a thread of its own.


You can find it here:- Fitted wardrobe problem

Good luck

squeaky

Hi kelmeg,

This is a discussion thread, so I've moved your question over to a questions one.

You can find your post here... Quick questions on Consumer Rights


Good luck

squeaky

Hi marc,

This is a discussion thread so I 've moved your post to a thread of its own.

Look for:- Bought Flowers online (e-Florist) PLEASE HELP

Good luck

Groovydaz37

Hi, New to the forum find it a bit daunting and hope I am putting this in the right place. I bought a 10" Android Tablet from Toy R Us just after Christmas. After very little use it has gone faulty (after 28 days). I am being told by the store that I must deal with the manufacturer direct. Having discussed it with the manufacturer they agree there is, possibly, a software issue. I am being told that I have to send this back to them - at my own cost.

I am a bit put out by this. Am I within my rights, as this is a faulty product, to get the store to exchange it? Why should I incur a cost when it is in warranty?

derrick

Groovydaz37 wrote: »

Hi, New to the forum find it a bit daunting and hope I am putting this in the right place. I bought a 10" Android Tablet from Toy R Us just after Christmas. After very little use it has gone faulty (after 28 days). I am being told by the store that I must deal with the manufacturer direct. Having discussed it with the manufacturer they agree there is, possibly, a software issue. I am being told that I have to send this back to them - at my own cost.

I am a bit put out by this. Am I within my rights, as this is a faulty product, to get the store to exchange it? Why should I incur a cost when it is in warranty?

No you are not, go to the Consumer Rights board and start a new thread there.


.

TheOne

Hi
Not posted on here for a while, but I found this article, and thought I post something I found (although I think similar may have been posted).
I was looking on ebay for some items, and found some of what I was looking for at quite a good price. I then looked at the sellers T&C posted on the item page, and read this:

"We offer a no quibble 14 day money back guarantee for all goods shipped correctly that are not required. The buyer will be responsible for the return postage and packaging charges at their expense. Also for item that have a postage cost charged for shipping the item out, that amount will not be refunded as we have already paid that item for it to be shipped out.

For items that have Free Post & Packaging charges, a deduction of 25% will be ducted for post and packaging charged from the amount paid and the balance will be refunded to the original method of payment. EXAMPLE Item Cost £19.99 + free P&P, if item returned, £15.00 will only be refunded. £5.00 will be deucuted for postage and packaging."

It's pretty clear that the seller is a UK business (as I have checked) and the above statement, if carried out, would be a pretty obvious breach of DSRs.
As mentioned in the DSR guide (linked a few times here I think)

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

The DSRs require you to refund any money paid by or on behalf of
the consumer in relation to the contract to the person who made the
payment. This means the full price of the goods, or deposit or prepayment made, including the cost of delivery.

(Section 3.48 page 25)

Just thought I'd post this to reiterate the rights of any unsuspecting 'ebayers' out there.

cepheus

Falsely claiming that a product is able to cure illnesses, dysfunction or malformations.

So how does the law consider alternative therapies, considering most of these have been shown to be no more effective than placebo?

mo786uk

cepheus wrote: »

So how does the law consider alternative therapies, considering most of these have been shown to be no more effective than placebo?

There are various well known altnertive therpies that i daresay regulators wont touch.

missing_string

Hi,

Apologies if this has been covered, I'm confused and can't really find the answer.

My mum bought a laptop a couple of months ago, and one of the speakers has broken and the cursor is really dodgy. Jumps all around the screen and doesn't always do what you tell it to.

Since she bought the laptop, there are much better spec laptops available in store for £20 more - can she demand a refund/store credit to get one of the better laptops, or must she settle for a repair/replacement?