Euro Car Parts - Ignoring the Sale of Goods Act?

Cousin_Vinny

I bought some brakes from Euro Car Parts last month for my car as there was a 50% off offer. Unfortunately the parts they provided didn't fit, but of course I only knew this when trying to fit them a few weeks later.

Their intial (numerous) emails simply re-stated that if they were not informed within 7 days and returned within 28, that I was not entitled to a refund and only a replacement. Clearly no good to me as the parts weigh a lot and would cost £20 - £30 to return!

My position was the goods were not as described or fit for purpose (as they didn't fit) but their response was just to continue to repeat that they "cannot authorise" a refund after 28 days. They completely ignored any questions about the SOGA and gave the impression their Terms and Conditions superceded it as I didn't notify them within the time they prescribe.

Any thoughts? I'm minded to immediately take it up with Trading Standards. I ended up having to pay more for the correct parts from a mechanic and am now lumbered with the incorrect parts that are too expensive to return!

ILW

How long did you hang onto these items?

Cousin_Vinny

I had them for about 3 weeks before I got the mechanic to fit them (I was on holiday). It would have been around a month after that I notified ECP they weren't correct.

Subjectively speaking is that an unreasonable length of time? I mean, the difference between correct/incorrect parts is 10mm so when I received them, all looked well. It was only when trying to fit them the problem was discovered so it's not something I could have known immediately.

visidigi

Did you use their finder tools for the right parts or did you select the parts yourself from a generic list?

Bought in store or online?

Cousin_Vinny

visidigi wrote: »

Did you use their finder tools for the right parts or did you select the parts yourself from a generic list?

Bought in store or online?

Online. Their parts finder requests make, model, engine size, transmission and fuel all of which I entered in and got a list of "suggested results". From that list I picked the most reasonable priced items.

Retrospectively, they have said to me I should have checked the specific part details or contacted them to ensure they were correct. My position was what was the point of entering that information if not all of the suggestions were going to be correct anyway?

If for example there were variants of the parts in the suggested list (different sizes) all it would have taken was a warning that it might not fit, or for a further filter to narrow it down to my specific car, there wasn't one.

I thought that as a consumer I'm entitled to rely on a professional parts supplier to make the correct suggestions according to information they request themselves!

ThumbRemote

Assuming the fault is on their side (ie you didn't just make a mistake and order the incorrect part) - and I'd say given your rpely above, it is - the law says you have a "reasonable" time to reject the goods.

If you informed them within 28 days I'd say that was reasonable (not like the 7 days they claim). But you appear ot have left it nearly 2 months, which really may be leaving it a little too long.

Cousin_Vinny

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Assuming the fault is on their side (ie you didn't just make a mistake and order the incorrect part) - and I'd say given your rpely above, it is - the law says you have a "reasonable" time to reject the goods.

If you informed them within 28 days I'd say that was reasonable (not like the 7 days they claim). But you appear ot have left it nearly 2 months, which really may be leaving it a little too long.

I received the parts on 3 June, my mechanic tried to fit them on 4 July so that's when I discovered the problem. I only got the details of sizes from the mechanic on 5 July though and notified ECP on 7 July.

So in total I had the parts 34 days before I "rejected" them. It is a long time I appreciate, however, in the circumstances it wasn't the kind of error that was obvious by looking at them, it was a 10mm difference so it's not like getting something blue when it should have been red!

thistledome

German Swedish and French (GSF) did the same thing to me with an electric aerial. The motor malfunctioned and wouldn't stop running so we had to cut the cable. Under GSF's t&c's they won't refund on anything that you've damaged. The fact that the motor jammed (i.e. was faulty) in the first place was superceded in their eyes by GSF rules.

These cheapo discount places probably operate like this to make up for the cheap prices and smaller margins for profit.

I don't use GSF anymore and source my parts from a more reputable, but more expensive, dealer. They don't care if they lose a few customers, there's plenty more fish in the sea who want cheap parts.

If you want to try with Trading Standards then go ahead. It won't cost you anything. Good luck.

ThumbRemote

Cousin_Vinny wrote: »

I received the parts on 3 June, my mechanic tried to fit them on 4 July so that's when I discovered the problem. I only got the details of sizes from the mechanic on 5 July though and notified ECP on 7 July.

So in total I had the parts 34 days before I "rejected" them. It is a long time I appreciate, however, in the circumstances it wasn't the kind of error that was obvious by looking at them, it was a 10mm difference so it's not like getting something blue when it should have been red!

Ah, fair enough. Earlier you said "I had them for about 3 weeks before I got the mechanic to fit them ... It would have been around a month after that I notified ECP they weren't correct." so I assumed 3 weeks plus 1 month.

If they are refusing to budge your only real option is small claims court. Given that you can justfiy the delay, and their terms and conditions are clearly illegal anyway, you'd probably win, though theres always a chance the judge would say you left it too late.

wealdroam

Cousin_Vinny wrote: »

I received the parts on 3 June, my mechanic tried to fit them on 4 July so that's when I discovered the problem. I only got the details of sizes from the mechanic on 5 July though and notified ECP on 7 July.

So in total I had the parts 34 days before I "rejected" them.

But you said earlier:

Cousin_Vinny wrote: »

I had them for about 3 weeks before I got the mechanic to fit them (I was on holiday). It would have been around a month after that I notified ECP they weren't correct.

So, which was it?

Did you have the goods for over seven weeks before reporting the problem to ECP, or was it 34 days?

Cousin_Vinny

wealdroam wrote: »

But you said earlier:

So, which was it?

Did you have the goods for over seven weeks before reporting the problem to ECP, or was it 34 days?

I had them for 34 days before notifying ECP. When I said it was a month after that I notified them, I meant a month after receiving them, not a month after the mechanic fitting them. Apologies for the confusion.

I don't think, in the circumstances, that's an unreasonable delay? Can Trading Standards take any action or only advise?