'This does not affect your statutory rights – what it really means' blog discussion

Former_MSE_Lee

This is the discussion to link on the back of Martin's blog. Please read the blog first, as this discussion follows it.

Read Martin's "This does not affect your statutory rights – what it really means" Blog.

Please click 'post reply' to discuss below.

Tigsteroonie

Er ... it's SEVEN words.

ETA. I see you've edited it now :rotfl:

ShaneUK

You need to amend your

Satisfactory quality, As Described, Fit for purpose, And last a Reasonable length of Time.

on the original article, as the D is not in red, so it currently reads as SAFART.

It is bad how many shop staff - including supervisors etc - that no nothing or very little about consumer rights.

Perhaps there is a gap in the market for a business to train shop staff/supervisors/managers on consumer rights!!

terra_ferma

ShaneUK wrote: »

You need to amend your


on the original article, as the D is not in red, so it currently reads as SAFART.

It is bad how many shop staff - including supervisors etc - that no nothing or very little about consumer rights.

Perhaps there is a gap in the market for a business to train shop staff/supervisors/managers on consumer rights!!

if it exists... John Lewis would be the ones providing it to their staff :-)

corbyboy

For me this comes down to the words we use and what exactly we mean by them.

For me, a "return" means you have brought it back because you have changed your mind, not because it's faulty.

terra_ferma

corbyboy wrote: »

For me this comes down to the words we use and what exactly we mean by them.

For me, a "return" means you have brought it back because you have changed your mind, not because it's faulty.

And what do you do if it's faulty?
A) keep it and ask for your money back
throw it away and ask for your money back
C) take it on a trip that ends at the shop where you purchased it... and ask for your money back

Daisy_Bell

In the 'Discus' Forum, I was reading about a problem a customer had with PC World about their refusal to replace or give a refund for a faulty laptop. They would only offer a repair, although the product was within the guarantee period. I tried to reply to that Post, but I was not a member (I thought I could use the same User Name and password as on here, but no.) Anyway, here is what I tried to write on that Forum.

"...I had exactly the same problem with PC World and that is why I won't deal with them any more.
The problem was with an external hard drive that packed up within the guarantee period. They would repair it but not replace it or give me a refund. I quoted the Sale Of Goods Act at them... 'Merchantable Quality' and all that, but to no avail. I got the same bumf from the Customer Service staff as Gary (On Discus) did. So I waited for ages to see a manager who reiterated what his Customer Service bod had said - that he could not authorise anything other than a repair; that anything else was up to the manufacturer! Baloney!

You need a hide like a rhinoceros to stand there and complain and keep on complaining in front of all the other (Interested) customers though and not many will go to those lengths. Anyway, it should not be necessary! As someone else said, staff should be trained in the basics of retail law and it should be an offense for retailers to try and wriggle out of their responsibilities the way some (like PC World) do!

These days I buy my electricals as far as possible from retailers like Tesco where there is always a 'No Quibble' refund - especially where faulty goods are concerned. Although having said that, I have noticed recently that on some of Tesco's receipts, which serve as guarantees, they do 'Try it on' and ask customers to contact an 0845 service telephone number before bringing back an article after two weeks! Why should they have to do this? We all know how expensive these numbers can turn out to be, so why should the customer be left out of pocket when their contract is with the retailer anyway? I always take anything faulty (which thankfully doesn't happen very often) back to Tesco or Asda (both as good as each other for this sort of thing) and never had a problem.

Anyway, in the event, after much ado about something that should have been very straightforward, I eventually did get a refund from PC World!

CALBEE_2

I bought some clothes from Fenn Wright Manson on Weds and was told I could return them and get a refund as long as I had the receipt. I tried to return them today (Fri) and was told that the company has gone into adminstration and no cash refunds would be given.

Surely, as I was told I could return them, and bought the goods in good faith, that promise of being able to return was part of the contract, and should eb honoured.Can they change the terms retrospectively?:mad:

terra_ferma

CALBEE wrote: »

I bought some clothes from Fenn Wright Manson on Weds and was told I could return them and get a refund as long as I had the receipt. I tried to return them today (Fri) and was told that the company has gone into adminstration and no cash refunds would be given.

Surely, as I was told I could return them, and bought the goods in good faith, that promise of being able to return was part of the contract, and should eb honoured.Can they change the terms retrospectively?:mad:

The problem here is not that they are changing their t&c, and not meeting legal obligations, but that they have gone into administration (ie run out of money). Those terms are no longer legally biding and there is a totally different set of regulations once administration kicks in.
Accepting returns of non-faulty items is the last of their worries now, and rightly so. Think of all the people who order goods and pay in advance, for example for furniture, and are not able to get their money back.
Without mentioning those who work for them and are about to lose their job.

Really... being stuck with an item they you don't want but can still give as a present or sell on ebay is not that bad is it?