Heavy bulky goods faulty - no need to return

malchish

custardy wrote: »

Are working items lighter?

???

With working, good items there is no legal right to a refund, so nobody should care about a consumer's back then.

However, reputable places often agree to collect unwanted items bought from a store, for a very small charge. John Lewis, for example. They prefer their customers to be happy and faithful.

Hintza

malchish wrote: »

With working, good items there is no legal right to a refund, so nobody should care about a consumer's back then.

However, reputable places often agree to collect unwanted items bought from a store, for a very small charge. John Lewis, for example. They prefer their customers to be happy and faithful.

Slightly at odds to what you were suggesting in the OP!

Searcher

malchish wrote: »

No. It isn't.

It is a normal, reasonable warning. Common sense.

Example:
"if you reverse into the back of someone's car and do not pay for repairs, you will be taken to court and will pay costs."
Is this blackmail?
No.

Nope, that's using the (threat of) legal process to get the cost of repairs caused by someone else's negligence. Something you are legally entitled to.

Threatening to rubbish someone in public unless they give you (enough) compensation is blackmail.

The two are entirely different.

Verb
Demand money from (a person) in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information:

mattyprice4004

So in summary:
OP posts rubbish
Rubbish is discredited
OP tries to back it up and fails

Seriously, that's all just BS. So go on, how will a faulty item that they managed to load into their car just fine when bringing it home suddenly break their back when returning it?

Hardly fair on retailers, but luckily the law isn't as !!!!!! as your idea of it.

Agricolae

Although I can understand why the OP (and this person who has come to them for advice) is cheesed off, I don't think he is being entirely reasonable. In fact one wonders whether his attitude may have made the retailer less inclined to be co-operative.

Usually there is a more reasonable way of getting goods back to a retailer other than demanding they pick it up. And I should point out that at this stage, the retailer only has the buyer's word for it that the item is faulty.

If the buyer's circumstances are such that it is inconvenient to return the item then there are probably ways around that other than getting on the phone and threatening the retailer with youtube exposure if they don't uplift the goods.

For example, can she not enlist the help of a friend with a bigger car or, if the item is too difficult to take apart, a stronger person to pack it back up again so it will fit in her own car?

I am afraid that having to complain about and return an item which may be faulty, is always going to involve a degree of inconvenience. I don't think compensation is warranted.

Valli

malchish wrote: »

4) It IS fair on the retailer. "Do not sell flat-packed trash to people, and you won't have to collect that trash back".

By the same token you could warn consumers NOT to buy 'flat pack trash' then they won't have to take it back/complain to retailers.:cool:

melbell

Time of the month?

Fergie76

I wouldn't consider 17 kgs too heavy or back breaking.

What is the item?

malchish

Tradingstandards.gov.uk:

"What if the goods are too heavy to carry back to the shop? Am I responsible for the cost of taking the goods back?
No. You can ask the seller to come and collect the goods as long as you have not held onto them for too long, and as long-as you bought the goods yourself. "

Posters who try to discredit this simple info must have an interest to intimidate consumers into not claiming their rights.
You can trash trqading standards together with my advice - well, off you go.

Flat packed items, unfortunately, do not have a warning on them "bad quality, trash". A consumer makes a purchase in good faith. A consumer is helped to the car, so does not carry the box.
To return the half-assembled trash, the consumer has to load this bulky stuff into the car, and it caqnnot fit anyway.
People who claim on here that in those circumstances this consumer must be denied a refund - are people with vested interests against consumer rights.
A person who has got time for 1000+ posts a year cannot be an expert (experts are far too busy for sitting on the internet for free), so genuine users of this site can make their conclusions.

A "threat" to put a genuine conversation on youtube is not a threat - because if a good customer service is provided - then there is nothing to be scared of. If the recording proves that the Robert Dyas were breaking the law - good for them, let the public know that. Good professionals are never afraid of anyone publicising their work.
Reporting or outing anyone who breaches the law is fair.
Full stop.

malchish

Valli wrote: »

By the same token you could warn consumers NOT to buy 'flat pack trash' then they won't have to take it back/complain to retailers.:cool:

You do it.

Especially if you can show which ones are trash and which ones are not.