New Look

superflygal

Hi TTG,

Get New Look's head office address, write to them.

Explain situation, tell them if you knew the coat had a life of 5 months you would have bought one from elsewhere. Add that you won't buy from their shop in the future, as the quality standard is lacking somewhat.

You should get some form of goodwill gesture.

ON the plus point, at least they offered to exchange it. You could get oe ordered from aother store? They HAVE to exchange WITHOUT a receipt by law by the way, if the item is faulty.

Superflygal x

mrbnewc1

If CS have told you it can be returned to the store for a full refund, I would do exactly that.

I expect items of clothing to last more than 5 months, especially a coat.

Ellie2758

mrbnewc1 wrote:

If CS have told you it can be returned to the store for a full refund, I would do exactly that.

I expect items of clothing to last more than 5 months, especially a coat.

So so I! OH's coat went back to BHS after a year when the zip broke. Replaced without question.

No_Future

As far as I know goods must be fit for purpose for a reasonable amount of time (words to that effect). A few months is hardly reasonable. You should be entitled to a refund.

gyzmo

The remedy that is available must be reasonable. For a broken zip, it would probably be reasonable to repair rather than replace or refund, or offer the cost of repair. A refund can be offered, but the amount would be reduced for fair usage.

Personally, I think a free repair is reasonable. A refund or replacement is ever so generous. Take what you can.

uktim29

superflygal wrote:

They HAVE to exchange WITHOUT a receipt by law by the way, if the item is faulty.

Superflygal x

Are you sure? Say if it's a brand stocked in several places how do you prove you've not brought something from one retail chain and then taken it back to another. Eg brought something from Argos and take it back to Woolworths.

I think proof of purchase would have to be required.

my_two_cents

No_Future wrote:

As far as I know goods must be fit for purpose for a reasonable amount of time (words to that effect). A few months is hardly reasonable. You should be entitled to a refund.

Correct, under the Sale of Good Act, the coat is not fit for purpose so you are entitled to a FULL refund.

A lot of company often try and force you into getting a repair or exchange and judging from most of posts here, it seems they are getting away with it. Once you accept to have it repaired, you can no longer get your money back, so the sensible thing to do is request for your money back.

Considering the fact that a coat is not worn all year round, one would expect to get at least two season's wear out of it i.e. two years use.

chika

Is it just me who can't belive this. A £35 coat is a cheap coat. I think five months is good going for a coat from a cheap shop like new look.

I'm suprised they offered you anything - IMHO you are lucky!

Cerenia

chika wrote:

Is it just me who can't belive this. A £35 coat is a cheap coat. I think five months is good going for a coat from a cheap shop like new look.

I'm suprised they offered you anything - IMHO you are lucky!

I bought a coat from Seconds Ahead 5/6 years ago (for £8) - and still going strong! I've had problems with New Look coats, I bought one, and the seam fell apart after 3 days! Needless to say, I go elsewhere for coats now.

furrypolka

my_two_cents wrote:

Correct, under the Sale of Good Act, the coat is not fit for purpose so you are entitled to a FULL refund.

A lot of company often try and force you into getting a repair or exchange and judging from most of posts here, it seems they are getting away with it. Once you accept to have it repaired, you can no longer get your money back, so the sensible thing to do is request for your money back.

This is wrong and I see people get this wrong fairly often.

Under the Sale of Goods Act, you only have a "reasonable time" to reject goods for a full refund. The law does not define this reasonable time, but case law (e.g. Bernstein v Pamson Motors) would suggest 2-3 weeks in normal faulty goods cases. It's intended to be a short period of time to enable the consumer to check the goods for faults.

After this reasonable time has passed (which it most definitely has in the OPs case) you are no longer automatically entitled to a full refund. The trader is entitled to offer a repair or replacement (at their discretion) in the first instance. If repair or replacement is impossible or fails, then the consumer can rescind the contract. Rescission is a partial refund to take into account any wear and tear that the consumer has had from the product.

The traders offering a repair or replacement are complying with the law and are entitled to do so, they certainly aren't "getting away with" anything.

The OP got a very good deal from New Look and that's good customer service, they certainly didn't have to do that.