We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
PC World 28 day rule???
PugLady_2
Posts: 235 Forumite
I bought a netbook from PC World for my daughter on 23rd December. I would never usually buy from them, but they were the only store that had it in stock so close to Christmas.
I took it back today as it had developed a fault on the motherboard and was refunded in full as I requested.
During my initial conversation with them I was told if I had bought it more than 28 days ago I wouldn't be entitled to an exchange or refund only a repair.
I disagreed with them on the 28 day limit and said under the Sales of Goods Act I would still be entitled to a refund. I was then told the law is different for computers because of the licence for windows 7 which is preinstalled. I asked what has that got to do faulty goods. The netbook has an inherent manufacturing fault and is not fit for purpose, as in it doesn't work. They just repeated the same story, to which I replied "I think Trading Standards would disagree".
I know it doesn't matter to me anyway as I was under their 28 day limit, but surely thats not right? They can't just fob people off like that surely?
There is no way I would have accepted a repair on an item that was just over 28 days old.
I took it back today as it had developed a fault on the motherboard and was refunded in full as I requested.
During my initial conversation with them I was told if I had bought it more than 28 days ago I wouldn't be entitled to an exchange or refund only a repair.
I disagreed with them on the 28 day limit and said under the Sales of Goods Act I would still be entitled to a refund. I was then told the law is different for computers because of the licence for windows 7 which is preinstalled. I asked what has that got to do faulty goods. The netbook has an inherent manufacturing fault and is not fit for purpose, as in it doesn't work. They just repeated the same story, to which I replied "I think Trading Standards would disagree".
I know it doesn't matter to me anyway as I was under their 28 day limit, but surely thats not right? They can't just fob people off like that surely?
There is no way I would have accepted a repair on an item that was just over 28 days old.
0
Comments
-
Yse, they have refunded/replace item as it is under 28 days. though the SOGAs does say that a repair can be offered, just that the retailer offers more than the minimum required.
Normally if the item is less than 6 months old, the onus is on the retailer to repair of replace as necessary, after 6 months it is up to the user to prove the fault is inherant0 -
I bought a netbook from PC World for my daughter on 23rd December. I would never usually buy from them, but they were the only store that had it in stock so close to Christmas.
I took it back today as it had developed a fault on the motherboard and was refunded in full as I requested.
During my initial conversation with them I was told if I had bought it more than 28 days ago I wouldn't be entitled to an exchange or refund only a repair.
I disagreed with them on the 28 day limit and said under the Sales of Goods Act I would still be entitled to a refund. I was then told the law is different for computers because of the licence for windows 7 which is preinstalled. I asked what has that got to do faulty goods. The netbook has an inherent manufacturing fault and is not fit for purpose, as in it doesn't work. They just repeated the same story, to which I replied "I think Trading Standards would disagree".
I know it doesn't matter to me anyway as I was under their 28 day limit, but surely thats not right? They can't just fob people off like that surely?
There is no way I would have accepted a repair on an item that was just over 28 days old.
You are entitled to a remedy under SOGA, unless the retailer can prove that there was no inherent fault with the product on purchase.
It may be that they wish to send the item for repair, which is a reasonable remedy if it resolves the fault with the item. If it cannot be repaired or it is uneconomical for them to repair the item, they should offer a replacement or refund.Best Regards
zppp
0 -
Actually SOGA says the consumer is entitled a full refund, if the fault is apparent within a "reasonable time."Freddie_Snowbits wrote: »Yse, they have refunded/replace item as it is under 28 days. though the SOGAs does say that a repair can be offered, just that the retailer offers more than the minimum required.
Normally if the item is less than 6 months old, the onus is on the retailer to repair of replace as necessary, after 6 months it is up to the user to prove the fault is inherant
"Reasonable time," is undefined in law, but it is not very long. Twenty-eight days has normally been the accepted standard for consumer electronics. If this is disputed, it will be up to a court to decide.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
H'mmm, going off your replies I'm glad I was under the 28 days.
I dont think I'd be too happy if I'd bought an expensive laptop and just over a month later all I was entitled to was a repair, if it developed a fault. A month doesn't seem a reasonable time to me.0 -
Thats the law, if the item was inherently faulty (especially a laptop or desktop) it would fail within a few weeks and usually as soon as it was opened up. A month is perfectly fine for computers, Best Buy only give 14 days for a full refund before a repair is required. It varies on whats being purchased, A rug and you would have a couple of days maybe a week at most, a Computer a few weeks to a month and a pair of ski's purchased in a sale in summer, a reasonable timeframe could be 3 or 5 months.
The law doesn't give a definite timeframe, fact is they were wrong regarding the license and you were wrong acting like you knew the law.0 -
This is an odd area - for some products and circumstances a reasonable time has been held to be years - in others days. I think 28 days is a bit light to be honest, but that might also depend on the cost of the kit in the first place too. Might stand up though. A second tier right is a partial refund though, which will probably also be almost a full refund anyway...0
-
Yes it does. If the fault is discovered within a reasonable period the buyer can reject outright for a full refund.
I agree. It does. s35 (4)
"The buyer is also deemed to have accepted the goods when after the lapse of a reasonable time he retains the goods without intimating to the seller that he has rejected them."0 -
This is an odd area - for some products and circumstances a reasonable time has been held to be years - in others days. I think 28 days is a bit light to be honest, but that might also depend on the cost of the kit in the first place too. Might stand up though. A second tier right is a partial refund though, which will probably also be almost a full refund anyway...
There is no second tier, the consumer has a resonable timeframe to inspect the goods and if faulty can get a refund/replacement/repair outside the reasonable time frame the retailer can choose what is most cost effective to them, which will in most cases be a repair0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards