bike fell off halfords bike rack

halibut2209

I'd just get it repaired elsewhere, then send a LBA, then sue them.

PZH

halibut2209 wrote: »

I'd just get it repaired elsewhere, then send a LBA, then sue them.

I'd send the LBA - and give them chance to act - then get it repaired and then try to claim the money back through Small Claims

FLENG

ok so i emailed the ceo david wild and got the same response

I am sincerely sorry that you are unhappy, however, how to pursue a claim with us, we will require sight of a proof of purchase. Unless this can be provided, we cannot consider offering further consideration to this matter.

I understand that this matter has been inconvenient and you have had some distress as a result of this, however our decision remains.


so i will get a couple of quotes and send then in with a lba
but if i have to take them to smalls claims court would i be able to claim my money back for the repairs even without the purchase receipt?

gregg1

fluffnutter wrote: »

I think I'd concentrate on the illogicality of their argument. Why are they prepared to admit liability and fix the rack without a receipt, yet require it in order to recompense you for the bike damage? The first action necessarily means that they've acknowledged they sold you the rack (which is, after all, what the receipt is for). By their own actions they've deemed the receipt an irrelevancy.

I agree with fluffnutter. Surely they have acknowledged their liability when they fixed the rack.

fluffnutter

FLENG wrote: »

so i will get a couple of quotes and send then in with a lba
but if i have to take them to smalls claims court would i be able to claim my money back for the repairs even without the purchase receipt?

Yes, that's the idea. Halfords policy here seems completely arbitrary and illogical. They've admitted liability, they know the rack was purchased from them, they fixed the rack.

However, they now want you to produce a missing piece of paper in order to meet a condition that has already been met.

The small claims court would hopefully rule in your favour and agree that, in this instance, the receipt is not necessary.

FLENG

fluffnutter wrote: »

Yes, that's the idea. Halfords policy here seems completely arbitrary and illogical. They've admitted liability, they know the rack was purchased from them, they fixed the rack.

However, they now want you to produce a missing piece of paper in order to meet a condition that has already been met.

The small claims court would hopefully rule in your favour and agree that, in this instance, the receipt is not necessary.

arr good to hear
thanks you and to everyone else who contributed!