Returning a faulty camera to John Lewis - Is what they're doing legal?

Zaph

Hey guys,

Last December (2010) my sister bought a relatively expensive camera (Sony NEX5 ~£450) from John Lewis.

It is now malfunctioning and refusing to read any memory card inserted into it.

Today she tried returning it to JL and was given a ridiculously hard time and fed, what sounds like, a load of rubbish (I'm pretty sure the sales assistant made up most of it).

First they complained to her that she didn't have the original box and a USB cable was missing (She asked why that matters, and was told "they need to box for it to be in resellable condition"). She asked if that means they're planning on reselling a faulty product. They said no and moved on.

Then they told her to contact Sony themselves. She pointed out that she bought it from John Lewis, not Sony.

Finally, the rep agreed to return the camera but they'll take at least 6 weeks to process it before they agree to a replacement. Directgov says the retailer should resolve the matter in a "reasonable amount of time". Is 6 weeks a reasonable amount of time to be without a camera you've paid for? He also said they'll require a 5% fee (about £20) to do this.

This immediately sounded suspicious to my sister and she asked what the £20 was for, the rep then started spouting something called "The Debit Agreement" (she bought the camera with a debit card).

At this point she walked away as she suspected he was trying to take advantage of her. I've since googled the so-called 'Debit Agreement' and found nothing.

I would appreciate it if anyone can shed some light on this and maybe advise on what to do next. My sister just wants a working camera and didn't expect to be given such a hard time from a retailer such as John Lewis.

Thanks,
Zaph.

dreamypuma

You say "last December" for clarity and so we can advise you appropriately please can you clarify if this was December 2010 (making the camera about 5 months old?)

Firstly, you are correct in saying your contract is with JL. However in some instances, it is often much quicker to deal with the manufacturer. This does not excuse the retailer of there statutory obligations to you.

Secondly, your sister has no obligation to provide all the packaging, if the item is being referred to JL them as faulty.

Is six weeks as reasonable amount of time for a repair? The term reasonable is debatable, and will probably only be established through a court in this instance. My personal opinion is that 6 weeks is reasonable for a camera which is being used for personal use.

I don't see the relevance of the £20/5% fee.

In your sisters shoes, after the first deluge of bilge, I would have asked to discuss the matter with a store manager or supervisor.

Zaph

Thanks for the quick reply dreamypuma.

Yes, it was December 2010. I've edited my original post to clarify.

While the term 'reasonable' is very ambiguous, 6 weeks (imo) seems excessive. Especially as I've seen other retailers just take your faulty product, pull a new one out of the packaging and hand it to you on-the-spot. But I guess that's completely at the vendor's discretion.

I believe she is going back tomorrow to speak with the department manager, but I wanted to get some advice to give her in case they try to fob her off again.

Zaph

kev.s

I'm with dreamy there, speak to store manager, and if possible take someone in as a witness. Jl are pretty good mostly, maybe just an idiot of a sales assistant

dreamypuma

Bare in mind, that a lot of retailers will quote "upto" 6 weeks to cover their own back. Also these sort of lead times can also be quoted to scare you into dealing directly with the manufacturer.

It may be worth contacting Sony directly, to see what they say. Sony are usually very good.

The retailer is under no obligation to replace the item there and then, and is entitled to attempt to repair the product.

I am surprised at this situation, particularly considering it is with JL. Then you may have just come up against a bad apple of a sales person.

Hintza

I have this argument on here constantly, get onto the Sony website and start a returns process, you should have it back within a fortnight.

Alternatively go through JL who will send it back to Sony who will then return it to JL who will then call you and thi will take up to six weeks. (Sure your contract is with JL and others wil argue against it but I try and be pragmatic about these things)

vyle

I think whoever served your sister is getting very, very confused.

There are, indeed, debit agreements with the manufacturer, which stipulate that for the store to return the product to the manufacturer for a refund, all the original accessories must be included and if there is anything missing, the store will be charged by the manufacturer.

Obviously, the store wishes to minimise the fees, so tries to obtain the original accessories where possible, but there is confusion as to whether the box constitutes an 'original accessory.' It doesn't (with most manufacturers, anyway).

Now, different manufacturers have different debit periods, sony sometimes does 6 months on some products, 18 months on others. Within the debit period, one can return the item for a straight swap, as it's nice and simple, however, sometimes sales assistants will debit an item, give a refund or replacement, then find out it wasn't debitable and create a huge bill for the store.

Outside the debit period, the item usually goes away for repair, which can take 2 to 6 weeks.

Here is where the confusion begins:

If the assistant assumed that your sister wanted a straight swap, then the item would have to be debited, but it wasn't in a debitable condition. What usually happens is one opens a new product, puts the fault camera inside, takes the fresh one out, and hey presto, we have one camera with all its accessories to be debited, and one camera for the customer.

If the customer wants a refund, they'd need to bring back the original accessories, as otherwise, they're getting cables, software and other parts of the purchase for free, when they're all included in the price.

The six weeks mentioned would relate to determining if the item truly was faulty and if it was a valid return, and the £20 would be the fee sony charged for a missing cable. Unfortunately, what the assistant didn't think about was that once the item disappeared off to the returns centre, should it be accepted, the branch would never hear about it, and should it be rejected, there's little chance he'd find it in the pile of returned items, nor remember why it was there.

I suspect that the assistant in question wasn't experienced in aftersales and had been told not to debit incomplete items due to the amount of money it costs the company, and tried, unsuccessfully, to do things 'properly.'

Even to experienced shop floor staff, the aftersales processes are a very complicated, scary world of paperwork, rules and procedures.

kazzah60

dpraved wrote: »

JL doing nothing wrong here. If you speak to a manager he might offer you a refund without any fuss but its all discretionary..

err sorry- but it's NOT discretionary - the SOGA is quite clear
where goods are not fit for purpose or are faulty then the buyer is entitled to a refund of their monies

kev.s

dpraved wrote: »

JL doing nothing wrong here. If you speak to a manager he might offer you a refund without any fuss but its all discretionary..

how's the gravity pull where you're living?... a google of SOGA would enlighten your lack of knowledge

wealdroam

kazzah60 wrote: »

err sorry- but it's NOT discretionary - the SOGA is quite clear
where goods are not fit for purpose or are faulty then the buyer is entitled to a refund of their monies

The SOGA is quite clear. The buyer is entitled to a remedy if the product is inherently faulty.
The seller is allowed to inspect the thing (or to ask an expert to look at it) to confirm that it has an inherent fault.

The seller is also entitled to offer a repair or replacement if the requested remedy is disproportionate.

Was a refund requested? I didn't notice it.

DCFC79

vyle wrote: »

I think whoever served your sister is getting very, very confused.

There are, indeed, debit agreements with the manufacturer, which stipulate that for the store to return the product to the manufacturer for a refund, all the original accessories must be included and if there is anything missing, the store will be charged by the manufacturer.

Obviously, the store wishes to minimise the fees, so tries to obtain the original accessories where possible, but there is confusion as to whether the box constitutes an 'original accessory.' It doesn't (with most manufacturers, anyway).

Now, different manufacturers have different debit periods, sony sometimes does 6 months on some products, 18 months on others. Within the debit period, one can return the item for a straight swap, as it's nice and simple, however, sometimes sales assistants will debit an item, give a refund or replacement, then find out it wasn't debitable and create a huge bill for the store.

Outside the debit period, the item usually goes away for repair, which can take 2 to 6 weeks.

Here is where the confusion begins:

If the assistant assumed that your sister wanted a straight swap, then the item would have to be debited, but it wasn't in a debitable condition. What usually happens is one opens a new product, puts the fault camera inside, takes the fresh one out, and hey presto, we have one camera with all its accessories to be debited, and one camera for the customer.

If the customer wants a refund, they'd need to bring back the original accessories, as otherwise, they're getting cables, software and other parts of the purchase for free, when they're all included in the price.

or if the customer already has the cables then leave the cables in the box that had the fresh new camera in it and put the faulty camera in that box so the customer goes away with a new camera,