My Consumer Rights. Avoid Caraudiocentre - in phase international

djpleasure

Hi Mse's, I have some questions regarding consumer rights and vendor antics, that hopefully some of you would be kind enough to answer in general.

1) If I purchased an item from an on-line retailer, would it be fair to expect that the item be current? meaning, if the product was up to 5 years old and now obsolete stock, the manufacturer ceased making that model that long ago and would not be covered by a manufacturers warranty, only that of the retailer. IMO over such a period of time, some material parts would be subject to natural weakening. Taking into consideration the above, should I not of been made aware of these facts prior to sale? I certainly would not have made the purchase, I expected new and current.

2) Pushing sales: On certain product ranges, you phone to order items of top well known brands they are supposed to stock, but it is apparent they do not stock at all. On phoning always told, sorry, not in stock, then disillusioned into a deal which on face value seems to be of higher value and a free upgrade and their own product range.

3) Now able to prove that a package was never fit for purpose in the start and as a result of this developed an unrepairable fault, items are obsolete and no manufacturer warranty, under 6 months old and of high value, from what I have read in consumer rights I should expect repair, replacement of refund?

4) The vendor refuses point blank to accept responsibility for anything, no matter how blatant the issues are. An offer to replace only one of the two items, initially offering me a model of lesser spec and worth half the price, and again, one of their own brands. Eventually offering to replace, again just one of the faulty items, at a price of forfeiting any rights I have. Any offer is followed with a clause, "The replacement will hold no warranty? even though the items carry 12 month warranty, and they were only 5 months old and used seldom, secondly that I agree to not leave any negative feedback about their company or it's products, with a threat of legal action if I do. replacement sent through is old, used and damaged! Any offer is always leaving me financially out of pocket, and unreasonable demands.

5) Never offered full replacements/repair/refund for both faulty items, always has a clause, one that only favours the vendor. Like for example, will refund, less 5 months wear/tear, regardless that products were never fit for purpose. If I do not accept, just frankly told, take them to court, then told, Judge will see they have tried so so hard to resolve and would see me as wasting their time.

6) When replacing one item, with a damaged used replacement, they also returned my other item which was half working when sent to them, now rendered useless as they cut it open to inspect, telling me to Evo-stick it back together, they claim it was not cut open.

7) How legitimate is it to demand that I do not leave any negative feedback/review in regards to the treatment I have received? threats of legal action, any offer of replacing my products has this clause attached. In my opinion this differs in no way to the recent footballers saga, the player messes around behind his wife's back, gets caught, then tries to slap a gagging order on them. To enlighten some more, On a forum related to such products, many many disgruntled customers spoke out about their experience, the forum was contacted and legal action was instigated, "publishing material that can cause them loss of business was quoted." The forum as just an on-line community did not have the resources to fight such as case, so any negative feedback and the topic has to be locked, for fear of other legal threats. The internet is great, want a product, first search for reviews of product and company, but, if nobody can leave truthful feedback unless it is possible, surely this cannot be acceptable?

8) I have now advised that I will not accept the conditions attached to any resolve as they favour the vendor and ignore my consumer rights completely. I have enlightened them to my consumer rights and entitlements and their obligation as a retailer. I will now be taking to the small claims court, reporting to consumer direct and trading standards. Any advice or guidance with this greatly appreciated. What exactly can I claim for? Can I claim for the stress and inconvenience this has caused me. Ideally I would want a full refund, returning all products and then never having the misfortune of dealing with them again. I will also have to pay out for an expert review of products, suitability and faults. I have several witnesses to certain issues, can any claim be made for their time, effort and travel

Currently I will refrain from mentioning the company's name or products involved, but this is not through fear of legal action, I will certainly make it clear if I win the case, which I can see no reason why I would not.

What more can I do to try to put an end to this practice, at the same time protecting potential vulnerable consumers from being treated the same.

Best Regards and thanks in advance for any help, advice and guidance.

Valli

Your post is probably far too long for anybody to bother to read and respond TBH.

Insomnia's a booger, isn't it?

fluffnutter

djpleasure wrote: »

Hi Mse's, I have some questions regarding consumer rights and vendor antics, that hopefully some of you would be kind enough to answer in general.

1) If I purchased an item from an on-line retailer, would it be fair to expect that the item be current? meaning, if the product was up to 5 years old and now obsolete stock, the manufacturer ceased making that model that long ago and would not be covered by a manufacturers warranty, only that of the retailer. IMO over such a period of time, some material parts would be subject to natural weakening. Taking into consideration the above, should I not of been made aware of these facts prior to sale? I certainly would not have made the purchase, I expected new and current. < It's not a consumer right that the item is current. Provided the item is not misrepresented, nor your statutory rights breached, a retailer can sell old stock >

2) Pushing sales: On certain product ranges, you phone to order items of top well known brands they are supposed to stock, but it is apparent they do not stock at all. On phoning always told, sorry, not in stock, then disillusioned into a deal which on face value seems to be of higher value and a free upgrade and their own product range. < What does 'disillusioned into a deal' mean? If you don't want the retailers product range, don't buy it. Provided they don't pretend their range is the top well known brand, they're not breaking the law. You *could* try to argue that advertising something they never sell is false advertising, but I doubt you'd be able to prove this. This is no more than an irritation to be honest. Shop elsewhere >

3) Now able to prove that a package was never fit for purpose in the start and as a result of this developed an unrepairable fault, items are obsolete and no manufacturer warranty, under 6 months old and of high value, from what I have read in consumer rights I should expect repair, replacement of refund? < Yes (take it up with the retailer - the manufacturer warranty is neither here nor there in this instance) >

4) The vendor refuses point blank to accept responsibility for anything, no matter how blatant the issues are. An offer to replace only one of the two items, initially offering me a model of lesser spec and worth half the price, and again, one of their own brands. Eventually offering to replace, again just one of the faulty items, at a price of forfeiting any rights I have. Any offer is followed with a clause, "The replacement will hold no warranty? even though the items carry 12 month warranty, and they were only 5 months old and used seldom, secondly that I agree to not leave any negative feedback about their company or it's products, with a threat of legal action if I do. replacement sent through is old, used and damaged! Any offer is always leaving me financially out of pocket, and unreasonable demands. < Pursue them for a replacement of equal value and quality of the original. And don't shop there again >

5) Never offered full replacements/repair/refund for both faulty items, always has a clause, one that only favours the vendor. Like for example, will refund, less 5 months wear/tear, regardless that products were never fit for purpose. If I do not accept, just frankly told, take them to court, then told, Judge will see they have tried so so hard to resolve and would see me as wasting their time. < You don't know what a judge would say, and neither do they >

6) When replacing one item, with a damaged used replacement, they also returned my other item which was half working when sent to them, now rendered useless as they cut it open to inspect, telling me to Evo-stick it back together, they claim it was not cut open. < Ask for a replacement for your other item >

7) How legitimate is it to demand that I do not leave any negative feedback/review in regards to the treatment I have received? threats of legal action, any offer of replacing my products has this clause attached. In my opinion this differs in no way to the recent footballers saga, the player messes around behind his wife's back, gets caught, then tries to slap a gagging order on them. To enlighten some more, On a forum related to such products, many many disgruntled customers spoke out about their experience, the forum was contacted and legal action was instigated, "publishing material that can cause them loss of business was quoted." The forum as just an on-line community did not have the resources to fight such as case, so any negative feedback and the topic has to be locked, for fear of other legal threats. The internet is great, want a product, first search for reviews of product and company, but, if nobody can leave truthful feedback unless it is possible, surely this cannot be acceptable? < Their threats have no legal backing. Ignore them. Provided you don't libel them, you can write what you like. Be careful about personal details though >

8) I have now advised that I will not accept the conditions attached to any resolve as they favour the vendor and ignore my consumer rights completely. I have enlightened them to my consumer rights and entitlements and their obligation as a retailer. I will now be taking to the small claims court, reporting to consumer direct and trading standards. Any advice or guidance with this greatly appreciated. What exactly can I claim for? Can I claim for the stress and inconvenience this has caused me. Ideally I would want a full refund, returning all products and then never having the misfortune of dealing with them again. I will also have to pay out for an expert review of products, suitability and faults. I have several witnesses to certain issues, can any claim be made for their time, effort and travel < Legally you shouldn't have to pay for an independent review as your goods are under six months. The onus is not on you to prove they're faulty; it's on the retailer to prove they're not. That aside, by the sounds of this company, I doubt you'll get anywhere so, if you've definitely decided to go to the small claims court, make sure the cost of this review is included in what you're claiming for. Any legitimate expense, e.g. travel, phone calls etc. can also be claimed for, I guess, but if you're after compo for distress you're asking the wrong person; I don't agree with compensation for anything other than financial loss >

Currently I will refrain from mentioning the company's name or products involved, but this is not through fear of legal action, I will certainly make it clear if I win the case, which I can see no reason why I would not. < Name and shame >

What more can I do to try to put an end to this practice, at the same time protecting potential vulnerable consumers from being treated the same. < Save your efforts, or go and work for Which >

Best Regards and thanks in advance for any help, advice and guidance.

Seeing as I'm a bit bored this morning... see above.

What's the company by the way? If you want to help others, why not tell us who they are?

arcon5

djpleasure wrote: »

Hi Mse's, I have some questions regarding consumer rights and vendor antics, that hopefully some of you would be kind enough to answer in general.

1) If I purchased an item from an on-line retailer, would it be fair to expect that the item be current? meaning, if the product was up to 5 years old and now obsolete stock, the manufacturer ceased making that model that long ago and would not be covered by a manufacturers warranty, only that of the retailer. IMO over such a period of time, some material parts would be subject to natural weakening. Taking into consideration the above, should I not of been made aware of these facts prior to sale? I certainly would not have made the purchase, I expected new and current.

Answer = Due diligance

Vendors can sell what they like of any age, do your research.

Items should be of satisfactory quality and last a reasonable time -- bearing in mind price paid and age of goods. Older goods are usually reflected in the price.

You still have statutory rights.

2) Pushing sales: On certain product ranges, you phone to order items of top well known brands they are supposed to stock, but it is apparent they do not stock at all. On phoning always told, sorry, not in stock, then disillusioned into a deal which on face value seems to be of higher value and a free upgrade and their own product range.

At which point you can say 'no thanks, i'm not interested'

3) Now able to prove that a package was never fit for purpose in the start and as a result of this developed an unrepairable fault, items are obsolete and no manufacturer warranty, under 6 months old and of high value, from what I have read in consumer rights I should expect repair, replacement of refund?

Retailers have a right (and rightly so) to refund and deduct a reasonable amount depending on the amount of use. If you have a 40" TV for 2 years which developes a fault and you are refunded -- why shouldn't they be able to make a deduction?

If the item has never been fit for purpose, why would you not repot it straight away rather than after 5 months? Problem solved

4) The vendor refuses point blank to accept responsibility for anything, no matter how blatant the issues are. An offer to replace only one of the two items, initially offering me a model of lesser spec and worth half the price, and again, one of their own brands. Eventually offering to replace, again just one of the faulty items, at a price of forfeiting any rights I have. Any offer is followed with a clause, "The replacement will hold no warranty? even though the items carry 12 month warranty, and they were only 5 months old and used seldom, secondly that I agree to not leave any negative feedback about their company or it's products, with a threat of legal action if I do. replacement sent through is old, used and damaged! Any offer is always leaving me financially out of pocket, and unreasonable demands.

Warrantys usually don't get extended when a remedy is offered. This does NOT affect your statutory rights under Sales of Goods Act.

Only the faulty items should be replaced. If you have two of the same item and one developes a fault -- one sould be replaced, repaired or refunded (retailers choice). If both are faulty, a remedy should be offered for both -- doesn't necessarily have to be the same remedy.

5) Never offered full replacements/repair/refund for both faulty items, always has a clause, one that only favours the vendor. Like for example, will refund, less 5 months wear/tear, regardless that products were never fit for purpose. If I do not accept, just frankly told, take them to court, then told, Judge will see they have tried so so hard to resolve and would see me as wasting their time.

Refunds leass reasonable use == perfectly acceptable

6) When replacing one item, with a damaged used replacement, they also returned my other item which was half working when sent to them, now rendered useless as they cut it open to inspect, telling me to Evo-stick it back together, they claim it was not cut open.

Little more complicated, so depends what you can prove or the balance of probabilities. If a retailer damages an item during inspecting, they should repair it as they have a duty a reasonable care and skill.

7) How legitimate is it to demand that I do not leave any negative feedback/review in regards to the treatment I have received? threats of legal action, any offer of replacing my products has this clause attached. In my opinion this differs in no way to the recent footballers saga, the player messes around behind his wife's back, gets caught, then tries to slap a gagging order on them. To enlighten some more, On a forum related to such products, many many disgruntled customers spoke out about their experience, the forum was contacted and legal action was instigated, "publishing material that can cause them loss of business was quoted." The forum as just an on-line community did not have the resources to fight such as case, so any negative feedback and the topic has to be locked, for fear of other legal threats. The internet is great, want a product, first search for reviews of product and company, but, if nobody can leave truthful feedback unless it is possible, surely this cannot be acceptable?

This isn't acceptable. But if a retailer deals with an issue fairly and promptly then I usually leave positive feedback anyway.

Feedback blackmail is against ebays policies so report them. This will not affect your rights under SOGA so ignore it.

8) I have now advised that I will not accept the conditions attached to any resolve as they favour the vendor and ignore my consumer rights completely. I have enlightened them to my consumer rights and entitlements and their obligation as a retailer. I will now be taking to the small claims court, reporting to consumer direct and trading standards. Any advice or guidance with this greatly appreciated. What exactly can I claim for? Can I claim for the stress and inconvenience this has caused me. No Ideally I would want a full refund, returning all products and then never having the misfortune of dealing with them again. I will also have to pay out for an expert review of products, suitability and faults. I have several witnesses to certain issues, can any claim be made for their time, effort and travel
Travel and costs perhaps. If you have had the item for more than 6 months the burden of proof is on the consumer, if an inherent fault is discovered you can claim the cost back from the retailer.

Tell us more about this problem for better advise......

Currently I will refrain from mentioning the company's name or products involved, but this is not through fear of legal action, I will certainly make it clear if I win the case, which I can see no reason why I would not.

What more can I do to try to put an end to this practice, at the same time protecting potential vulnerable consumers from being treated the same.

Trading standards
Consumer direct
County court if you need to enforce your rights
Growing a backbone will also help some people (but I do feel sorry for elderly people in vulnerable positions)

Best Regards and thanks in advance for any help, advice and guidance.

............................................

djpleasure

Thank you for the advice. As the vendor/company are not responding to my communication as I refuse to accept the conditions to silence me as well as condition I forfeit my consumer rights., I will disclose, name and shame.
I have been dealing directly with Steve Digva, The CEO of In phase International (ipiltd), also trading as Caraudiocentre.co.uk. They own DB Audio products as well.

Incidently, what type of company charges its customers 75p per minute to organise returns? You can email, but it is ignored, you can phone direct to head office, ask to be put through to returns, never anyone available, call back promise never materialises.

On a forum namely Talkaudio, members spoke out in regards to unprofessional and diabolical treatment they had received at the hands of the above named companies. Now posts are closed straight away, as the forum owners were threatened with legal action, an action they did not have the finance to defend.

The bottom line, if you buy from these companys, great price if everything goes ok, but if it goes wrong, is a bumpy ride to say the least. Pay a little extra, go elsewhere.

Am I better off Trading Standards or Consumer direct in the first instance?

wealdroam

djpleasure wrote: »

Am I better off Trading Standards or Consumer direct in the first instance?

Neither will make you better off.

I would report any issue to Consumer Direct.

CD will, if they deem it appropriate, report the issue to the Trading Standards organisation covering the trader's location.

djpleasure

CD it is then, thanks :-), initiated and have my Reference, so here we go, will report back once any outcome is acheived

unholyangel

If you paid directly with credit card (and not via a 3rd party like paypal) and the goods total over £100 (even if you only paid a deposit on the card), you could claim under section 75.

Also, rather tired so forgive me i missed it in your post but before filing in small claims court, remember to send them a letter before action. Keep it straightforward (leave out emotional things ie distress it has caused etc) and detail what the problem is and what you want them to do to remedy it and when you want it done by (usually 7 or 14 days). Then send the letter off recorded delivery.

djpleasure

Was paid for using a debit card. I served them a letter a couple of weeks ago, this is when communication started to look better, but then just made unreasonable part offers with clauses attached. Goods came in at just over £312. Communication ran hot and cold, one minute offers a deal to suit them, and then when I refuse it and the conditions they attach, they say, take it to court, then last minute communicate again, but always with silly offers and always stating NO WARRANTY. I will send one last letter, tell them what I want as a reasonable resolve, if no joy, press on with court action.