Logitech being big meanies! Won't honour warranty.

miduck

robo989 wrote: »

In terms of the 50% discount code, that's another matter. That really is worth something, it's not just a code obtained off hotukdeals. If they give me a new one of those codes then and the £49 refund at least I can put that towards getting the UE900s.

They have no obligation to "replace" the code - you provided no consideration for it so no contractual relationship exists in this respect.

halibut2209

The OP absolutely has the right to bring up the discount. They paid for the headphones using £49 cash (or card) AND a voucher. Both of those are legitimate forms of payment.

Saying that the OP got the voucher for free therefore it is irrelevant is as silly as saying "you were given cash as a birthday present so forget about it.

The retail price was £99 which was paid via 2 media. Any refund/resolution should reflect that

robo989

miduck wrote: »

As already mentioned, this all comes down to the wording of the warranty. I have quoted the relevant section below:



OP, what part of this do you believe Logitech are not fulfilling?

They are fulfilling it completely.

I guess this has run it's course, it's just a crappy situation to be in. If they were out of warranty of course that would be fine but end of the day, if a products in warranty consumers generally expect an item to be repaired or replaced with an equivalent or better model.

I'm not an old man just yet, but in my 20 years of buying electronic goods I have never been offered a refund instead of a replacement/repair. It makes it quite a pain in the backside, that is all.

It sounds like I maybe shouldn't have posted this here, as it's not regarding legal rights, Hope I can rely on the clarity of you helpful people if a genuine legal issue arises in the future for some help as you all seem to know exactly what you're talking about.

Thanks again for taking the time to post and help me with where I stand on this.

miduck

halibut2209 wrote: »

The OP absolutely has the right to bring up the discount. They paid for the headphones using £49 cash (or card) AND a voucher. Both of those are legitimate forms of payment.

Saying that the OP got the voucher for free therefore it is irrelevant is as silly as saying "you were given cash as a birthday present so forget about it.

The retail price was £99 which was paid via 2 media. Any refund/resolution should reflect that

A discount voucher has no value outside of the specified transaction. You cannot compare it to cash.

halibut2209

Good job that it's only this specified transaction which is the issue then. And in that specified transaction, it has the value of £50, or the value of a "50% discount voucher"

robo989

miduck wrote: »

A discount voucher has no value outside of the specified transaction. You cannot compare it to cash.

I don't think he meant to offer the cash refund of £99, but to offer the £49 paid + another 50% voucher.

halibut2209

If that's what miduck though I meant, then yes. The OP is not entitled to £99 refund. But could well be entitled to be put back in his original position. ie £49 and a 50% voucher

CoolHotCold

halibut2209 wrote: »

If that's what miduck though I meant, then yes. The OP is not entitled to £99 refund. But could well be entitled to be put back in his original position. ie £49 and a 50% voucher

Ahh, but then you get into the technical side, If that voucher had a expiry date of 2012 then his original position would be £49 plus 50% discount that expired in 2012.


But Logitechs T&C do allow them to either repair, replace or refund to the price paid. So the OP would get £49 is that is only what he paid, if he wanted more he would have to go down the SoGA route, right now he is going through Logitechs T&C in which is stated Here

halibut2209

I think that the OP could also reasonably argue "I had a voucher that still had 3 months left on it"

Any court would side with the breachee of a contract rather than the breacher.

neilmcl

robo989 wrote: »

They are fulfilling it completely.

Then wouldn't it be a good idea to update the thread title?