B&Q Not Interested

JournalGirl

You may find that it's worth contacting the manufacturer...although your consumer rights are with the store, sometimes a manufacturer will help (Particularly if you're willing to upgrade). Try calling their technical helpline first, be honest, and see what they suggest...you never know, there may be an adjustment or something which would make it cut more evenly ....?

shandypants5

JournalGirl wrote: »

It may also end up with less favourable return terms for the rest of us (we will test it and only give your money back when we are satisfied it's faulty)

I think thats very unlikely.

BUT what may result is that the manufacturers DO test all returns and discover that certain models are not faulty, but are being returned for just being rubbish.

Then maybe they would stop selling not fit for pupose goods.

OP, I was in the very same situation with a flymo fro BnQ about 4 years ago.

I just took it into the shop and stood there telling the manager how rubbish it was and he kindly allowed me to buy a dearer one and pay the difference.

If it doesnt cut your grass nicely then it is not fit for purpose.

visidigi

shandypants5 wrote: »

So they have to keep all returned items in a stockroom with all the relevent purchase/return data.
Then ship it to another facility so that a qualified electritian can test for a fault that may or may not be intermittant and not show itself.

Then they need to chase up any returns that prove to be not faulty and TRY to get the customer to pay back the money they have already been refunded by now.

Yes, Yes I can see your point now, it makes perfect buisiness sense.:rotfl:

Have you heard of a barcode? Do you have any idea what a barcode contains? The collection of data is not a difficult process - they would most likely outsource testing or indeed return it to manufacturer, which although may not necessarily adjust the returns acceptance it could significantly affect future product cost as this has to be factored into the manufacturing supply and cost chain.

As for trying to get the pruchaser to give the money back, you might want to check the small print on a returns receipt next time you have one, you might be surprised what it says...

shandypants5 wrote: »

If it doesnt cut your grass nicely then it is not fit for purpose.

Absolute rubbish!


This 'fit for purpose' line is so overused round here - If, in the OP's opinion it doesn't cut the grass nicely that is NOT acceptable for fit for purpose - its the manufacturers specification and detailled capability versus actual performance.


If the mower doesn't cut grass in general then the product is not fit for purpose - but if the product cuts grass then its fit for purpose, the quality to which it cuts the grass is why you get more expensive mowers than £40.


How do we know the length of the grass the OP is trying to cut? It could be a foot deep for all we know...seriously this 'fit for purpose' line seems to have become the answer to every thread on here when it simply isn't.

Fit for purpose is not based on personal opinion, its based on manufacturer specification/performance versus actual specification/performance.

System

i work for a company similar to b+q and owned by the same parent group, faulty returns are sent back to head office every week and are stripped and recycled . they rarely go back to the manufacturer unless there is a quality issue.

fluffnutter

A company would never test something, discover it's working, then try to pursue the customer it had refunded. The customer could merely say 'well, it didn't work when I tried it'. Plenty of faults are intermittent - particularly with electrical goods. Something being jolted around in transit could quite easily reconnect a loose connection, say. It would be utterly pointless to try to pursue anyone - their argument that it didn't work when they used it would be irrefutable.

easyhost

fluffnutter wrote: »

A company would never test something, discover it's working, then try to pursue the customer it had refunded. The customer could merely say 'well, it didn't work when I tried it'. Plenty of faults are intermittent - particularly with electrical goods. Something being jolted around in transit could quite easily reconnect a loose connection, say. It would be utterly pointless to try to pursue anyone - their argument that it didn't work when they used it would be irrefutable.

i agree, i had a similar problem with a wireless router, mine burnt out so the only one i could get at the time (quickly) was from a local computer shop. when i got it home the power light would not come on, tried on several sockets and still no power, took it back to him, he plugged it in and it worked straight away, so he refused a refund or replacement. so i was down £25 until i sold it on ebay with a note on the power problem i had, so i got my money back that way

dan_l

visidigi wrote: »

Have you heard of a barcode? Do you have any idea what a barcode contains? The collection of data is not a difficult process - they would most likely outsource testing or indeed return it to manufacturer, which although may not necessarily adjust the returns acceptance it could significantly affect future product cost as this has to be factored into the manufacturing supply and cost chain.

As for trying to get the pruchaser to give the money back, you might want to check the small print on a returns receipt next time you have one, you might be surprised what it says...



Absolute rubbish!


This 'fit for purpose' line is so overused round here - If, in the OP's opinion it doesn't cut the grass nicely that is NOT acceptable for fit for purpose - its the manufacturers specification and detailled capability versus actual performance.


If the mower doesn't cut grass in general then the product is not fit for purpose - but if the product cuts grass then its fit for purpose, the quality to which it cuts the grass is why you get more expensive mowers than £40.


How do we know the length of the grass the OP is trying to cut? It could be a foot deep for all we know...seriously this 'fit for purpose' line seems to have become the answer to every thread on here when it simply isn't.

Fit for purpose is not based on personal opinion, its based on manufacturer specification/performance versus actual specification/performance.

Come on this is the real world, B&Q aren't going to extensively test a £40 lawn mower and then send the heavies round to recover the money if it turns out not to be faulty.

DVardysShadow

sabz3008 wrote: »

Unfortunately, because it's not faulty...You can't do much really, and for £40 - It is 'fit for purpose' as it's...Well, a cheap lawnmower, you can't expect high performance from £40

Its purpose is to cut grass. If on day 1 it fails to do this adequately, then it is not fit for purpose. The "It only cost £40" argument is no excuse here - it might carry weight if the lawnmower degrades and does not work next season.

shandypants5 wrote: »

... If it doesnt cut your grass nicely then it is not fit for purpose.

I agree with the above. Its purpose is to cut grass and doing it nicely is strongly implied.

visidigi wrote: »

shandypants5 wrote: »

... If it doesnt cut your grass nicely then it is not fit for purpose.

Absolute rubbish!

This 'fit for purpose' line is so overused round here - If, in the OP's opinion it doesn't cut the grass nicely that is NOT acceptable for fit for purpose - its the manufacturers specification and detailled capability versus actual performance.

If the mower doesn't cut grass in general then the product is not fit for purpose - but if the product cuts grass then its fit for purpose, the quality to which it cuts the grass is why you get more expensive mowers than £40.

How do we know the length of the grass the OP is trying to cut? It could be a foot deep for all we know...seriously this 'fit for purpose' line seems to have become the answer to every thread on here when it simply isn't.

Fit for purpose is not based on personal opinion, its based on manufacturer specification/performance versus actual specification/performance.

I doubt the manufacturer of this product has any sort of specification relating to the user perception of the quality of the cut. In fact deficiencies in or lack of a manufacturer specification covering user perception are often the root cause of the product not being fit for purpose. You are well up the pole if you believe that a manufacturer's specification is the governing criterion as to whether a product is fit for purpose.

My cynical self says that B&Q are very likely to sell products which look like a lawnmower, make a noise like a lawnmower when switched on and extract £40 from the customer when sold, but actually fail to fulfil the essential function of a lawnmower. A product built to a manufacturer's marketing led specification along these lines would meet your definition of 'fit for purpose' but would fail to meet a Sale of Goods 'fit for purpose' criterion.

Agreed we don't know the length of grass OP is trying to cut. But assuming that the cut is only a reasonable expectation, then the mower is probably not fit for purpose. And your comment of 'absolute rubbish' on shadypants is unjustified.

spadoosh

£40 on a mower isnt that much really so cant expect years and years of use (although the mower does work fine! just not to your standards)

* Most b&q stores will test the product but depends on how trustworthy the shopper looks (plug and check)
* They will definately not resell it being used as its electrical and not been tested (certified) will be disposed off
* Flymo is a good brand in mowers and as such hard to believe that they would sell something that isnt a mower as one
* Did you speak to staff about the product before purchase as they would tell you pros and cons!?!?
* Speak to flymo about your views on the item being sub standard (not b&q's fault, only retailer)

Flyboy152

JournalGirl wrote: »

No but what they will do is ship all faulty returns back to the supplier, who will often do their own research on the faults. I think it is unlikely that anything would come back to the person returning the item, but it may.

It may also end up with less favourable return terms for the rest of us (we will test it and only give your money back when we are satisfied it's faulty)

Seeing as the manufacturers' contract is with the retailer, it is highly unlikely the manufacturers would have any legal return to the customer anyway.