Entitled To Refund ?

arcon5

Just to state what has already been said:

"If something's faulty - in other words it breaks the SAD FART rules - returning it speedily is crucial.

• Within four weeks: You can usually still get a full refund as you're unlikely to be seen as having 'accepted' the goods. After that only expect an exchange, repair or part refund.
• Within six months: The shop must prove the item wasn't faulty when the transaction took place. After that period you must prove it was."

Within four weeks means within 4 weeks of purchasing, not 4 weeks of discovering a fault.

I don't understand why this means you have little rights. They are legally required to offer a remedy, what they choose is tnow their choice. They are replacing it for a working one, leaving you in the same position as before -- with a fault free ipad 1.

DontWorryBeHappy wrote: »

When I left the shop in December I had the most up-to-date version of the iPad in my bag. Therefore, if I am truely entitled to be returned to the same position, shouldn't I be entitled to leave the shop with the most up-to-date version of the IPad in my bag once more ?

Thats some strange logic there

:think:

You wouldn't be in the same position, you would be in a better position than before, by having a newer, better product with greater funcionality.


Just ask nicely for a credit note, if they say yes then buy the newer one and pay the difference......................

dan_l

DontWorryBeHappy wrote: »

I am not arguing. I am not in possession of enough knowledge to argue. I am trying to FULLY understand MY RIGHTS. It appears that I have some rights but not nearly as many rights as the person who sold me the faulty goods. That seems unfair and it is not the initial impression you get from reading the Consumer Rights section of this website. The reality is that the retailer still has me held by the short and curlies.

I think that's a slight exagerration. They are willing to replace the device with what I expect will be a new one which in itself puts you in a better position because you will have a new Ipad instead of one a few months old.
Lets face it you probably wouldn't be asking this question had the Ipad 2 not have just come out.
As suggested a few times earlier, ask JL nicely to replace it with an Ipad 2 or a credit note and they may help you out but don't start banging on about rights and things being unfair.

PZH

halibut2209 wrote: »

I am trying to understand under what circumstances one is entitled to a cash refund?

Do you have an opinion on that ?

That was covered in Post #6

You are just angry (at the wrong people) because it is not what you want to hear.

We are not trying to be nasty or anything like that - we are just stating your rights as a consumer.

fluffnutter

DontWorryBeHappy wrote: »

When I left the shop in December I had the most up-to-date version of the iPad in my bag. Therefore, if I am truely entitled to be returned to the same position, shouldn't I be entitled to leave the shop with the most up-to-date version of the IPad in my bag once more ?

No, of course you shouldn't. If your iPad hadn't broken, you'd have been merrily playing with the first version. Or would you? Perhaps you'd have stomped into JL on hearing that the iPad2 had been released and demanded an upgrade! :rotfl:

DontWorryBeHappy

dan_l wrote: »

I think you know the answer to that.
It's pretty clear you are hoping to find a law/right which will allow you to get an Ipad 2 because your Ipad 1 broke but unless John Lewis do you a favour and let you swap it for the newer version, it aint going to happen.
If the law worked like this think how many people would be "finding faults" 11 months into their warranty so they could get a newer model.

I understand what you are saying but I didn't go looking for a fault, the fault found me, 3.5 months after paying £429 for it. I haven't bothered to include the rest of the shambolic attempt by JL to fix the fault as part of the thread, which included losing the iPad for 10 days, never returning phone calls, etc, etc, but to be perfectly honest I would have been ever so happy if the iPad had met my reasonable expectation of being fault free for a couple of years.

fluffnutter

dan_l wrote: »

I think that's a slight exagerration. They are willing to replace the device with what I expect will be a new one which in itself puts you in a better position because you will have a new Ipad instead of one a few months old.
Lets face it you probably wouldn't be asking this question had the Ipad 2 not have just come out.

Absolutely. It's just opportunism dressed up as 'rights'.

fluffnutter

DontWorryBeHappy wrote: »

I understand what you are saying but I didn't go looking for a fault, the fault found me, 3.5 months after paying £429 for it. I haven't bothered to include the rest of the shambolic attempt by JL to fix the fault as part of the thread, which included losing the iPad for 10 days, never returning phone calls, etc, etc, but to be perfectly honest I would have been ever so happy if the iPad had met my reasonable expectation of being fault free for a couple of years.

Well let's hope the replacement does just that . You want to try an iPad2 - apparently they've ironed out a lot of the original software bugs.

DontWorryBeHappy

Many thanks for all of the replies. I am just about to call John Lewis and ask them "nicely" if I can have a credit note instead of a replacement iPad.

halibut2209

Sounds like a plan.

But remember, that is purely down to their goodwill, and not your legal rights

DontWorryBeHappy

fluffnutter wrote: »

Well let's hope the replacement does just that . You want to try an iPad2 - apparently they've ironed out a lot of the original software bugs.

I wouldn't even know how to turn it on. It's my daughters.:D