S75 refund refused

thegoodman

McKneff wrote: »

Would other people press the Spam button for the idiot who posted no. 7 please.

Yes I have just done the thanks. Post 7 do have a point. If item is used why would shop take it back? You can find out if is wrong size just by try at home. No need to use the product for long.

Would shop take the shoes back after you have used it (not try) ?
Replace the shoes with the bike.

McKneff, just because someone makes a point that you do not agree with is NOT spam, is it?

oscar52

thegoodman wrote: »

McKneff, just because someone makes a point that you do not agree with is NOT spam, is it?

Post 7 has been removed - post 8 is now post 7 and so on.

The original post 7 was going on about bracelets and chemical sprays.

Heath_and_Heather

Some interesting discussion thanks for replies.

To clarify I rode the bike for 10m up and down the road, I believe this is reasonable to be able to fully inspect and assess the goods as to whether they are suitable. I advised the retailer I was more than happy to pay for the tyre to be cleaned, however they have outright refused to give me any refund or negiotiate whatsoever. I think they have thought if they ignore me I will go away.

With respect to the credit card company, interestingly they are offering to put pressure on the retailer to give me a refund direct but will not accept any liability whatsoever themselves, as they state there hasn't been a breach of contract, but they agree there has been a breach of regulations...

I guess I will have to escalate to the FSA, will let you know how I get on...

antrobus

Contact credit card company again and insist on a chargeback.

ppc1

Heath_and_Heather wrote: »

Some interesting discussion thanks for replies.

To clarify I rode the bike for 10m up and down the road, I believe this is reasonable to be able to fully inspect and assess the goods as to whether they are suitable. I advised the retailer I was more than happy to pay for the tyre to be cleaned, however they have outright refused to give me any refund or negiotiate whatsoever. I think they have thought if they ignore me I will go away.

With respect to the credit card company, interestingly they are offering to put pressure on the retailer to give me a refund direct but will not accept any liability whatsoever themselves, as they state there hasn't been a breach of contract, but they agree there has been a breach of regulations...

I guess I will have to escalate to the FSA, will let you know how I get on...

You can't escalate this issue to the FSA.

You will need to make a fomal complaint with the credit card company for declining the S75. If you have already complained they will need to issue you with a Final response letter. This gives you the right to take the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). Financial organisations are allowed up to 8 weeks to provide you with a response.

Good luck.

thenudeone

Heath_and_Heather wrote: »

With respect to the credit card company, interestingly they are offering to put pressure on the retailer to give me a refund direct but will not accept any liability whatsoever themselves, as they state there hasn't been a breach of contract, but they agree there has been a breach of regulations...

The Distance Selling Regulations are law and are an implied term of every relevant consumer contract automatically, just like the Sale of Goods Act.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2334/contents/made
A retailer cannot opt out of them.
The card issuer is jointly liable and is trying to use fancy words to attempt to accepting that.

Do you have legal cover with your home insurance? If so, get them involved. A call or letter to the retailer and / or the card company might resolve the issue.

However, by taking the bike outside for a ride you have made the situation more complicated, because by using the bike, it can be argued that you have accepted the goods.

I don't think the regulations wee meant to give consumers the right to try something out, then return it in a condition which can no longer be sold as "new", and still expect a full refund from the supplier.

Dabooka

Surely the company provided the goods / services paid for? Although the suitability is questioned by the OP, I don't see how this is S75, maybe Distance Selling Regs at best, but even then the goods need to be returned in an "as new" condition.

I suspect the OP has misunderstood the CC saying they're entitled to a refund under DSR not S75, and even then maybe it wasn't pointed out they'd used it for 10 miles!

I think agreeing to replace the tyres and a refund for the balance is as good as you can hope for. Ultimately you needed to check frame size suitability prior to going out on it.

I'll prepare for a flaming now

dtaylor84

Dabooka wrote: »

Surely the company provided the goods / services paid for? Although the suitability is questioned by the OP, I don't see how this is S75, maybe Distance Selling Regs at best, but even then the goods need to be returned in an "as new" condition.

S75 entitles the consumer to take action against the CC issuer instead of the retailer -- for any breach of contract, be it SoGA, DSR, or any other explicit or implicit contract term.

dazza.mk

Dabooka wrote: »

Surely the company provided the goods / services paid for? Although the suitability is questioned by the OP, I don't see how this is S75, maybe Distance Selling Regs at best,

Section 75 in itself is meaningless..... You can use Section 75 to hold a company liable for your rights under other legislation that is applicable to the original contract, this can be Sale of Goods Act, Distance Selling Regulations or anything other relevant legislation that introduced a liability on the seller.

Dabooka wrote: »

but even then the goods need to be returned in an "as new" condition.

See 3.58
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf/
.

System

I think the crux here is that DSRs allow the buyer to examine the goods they have ordered AS THEY WOULD IN A SHOP.

This does not include, in this instance, taking the bike for a ride so I tend to agree with the retailer that the goods are deemed to have been accepted as they have been used and are not faulty