Faulty training shoes : refuses to change because I used it

Valli

malchish wrote: »

The leaflet is not a legislation, but opinion. I know about the leaflet. But where is the source?

And yes, I write by "bablefish" from Japanese lol. I am impressed by your attempts to give me a gender, this is completely irrelevant to what the OP wants to know.

I'm not giving you a gender; I'm giving the OP one, I'm also pointing out that the OP doesn't seem to have English as HER first language, and therefore might easily misunderstand advice given.
I am not making any assumptions about your gender or, indeed, ethnic origin. I'm puzzled as to why you think I am doing so!

Valli wrote: »

When you give advice to this poster, malchish, please bear in mind that English doesn't appear to be her first language.

For clarity , nouns and pronouns ascribed to malchish are in red, and in the second person, nouns and pronouns ascribed to the OP are in the third person and blue

malchish

halibut2209 wrote: »

You missed out the important word. THEY have to prove, therefore they can choose the outlet. If you refuse then should it get to court you would lose by not letting them carry out their rights. Simples.

No, not that simples. The product, unitl you received your refund, is your property, and they have no right to dictate what to do with your property. They must act reasonably. If you offer a local inspection - they will have no reason to refuse. However, in many cases no repairer will touch a potential legal dispute with a bargepole, they just won't give a written report.
Usually, the only valid inspection is the inspection ordered by the judge. For this to happen, you need to keep your evidence.

malchish

browneyedbazzi wrote: »

It's all well and good to say never to give a faulty item to the retailer to have it examined etc because you don't have to, but unless you want to go through the small claims court every time you seek a remedy for a faulty product it isn't really a practical stance to take. It's often much quicker and easier to allow the retailer to have the product inspected.

Also the comments about not sending things off because the retailer/manufacturer may 'lose' them to prevent you claiming for damages is completely irrelevant to the OP and just confuses the matter. The OP doesn't have any damages to claim and simply wants a refund/replacement for the shoes.

And OP, please don't waste police time with this non-sense. I can't believe you'd even consider doing so.

Yes, you are right., I see your point. Of course the options should be evaluated.
However, in practice , when you behave "by the book" as an educated consumer, you never need court. It resolves before then.

malchish

Valli wrote: »

I'm not giving you a gender; I'm giving the OP one, I'm also pointing out that the OP doesn't seem to have English as HER first language, and therefore might easily misunderstand advice given.
I am not making any assumptions about your gender or, indeed, ethnic origin. I'm puzzled as to why you think I am doing so!



For clarity , nouns and pronouns ascribed to malchish are in red, and in the second person, nouns and pronouns ascribed to the OP are in the third person and blue

Sorry! Misunderstood then!:)

Valli

That's ok.

I assume she's female because her username is Jessica!

Jessica9_2

browneyedbazzi wrote: »

And OP, please don't waste police time with this non-sense. I can't believe you'd even consider doing so.

The retailer is wasting my time too : more than a month that I bought this trainers with my savings and cannot use them. I have called the police (to receive advice) after I have asked a question in this forum since nobody was answering to me. The retailer took the trainers but was refusing (and becoming aggressive) to provide a receipt acknowledging that I gave him the trainers back for inspection and description of the issue : this is a kind of theft. If for example I take trainers in the same retailer shop without paying and leave, obviously he will the right to call the police because I will be taking an asset from a certain from him without consent : it is the same for me.

I have called the police for information and they told me to call the Office of Fair Trading, after have provided a reference number.

The police officer equally told that normally after ONE week if the retailer was not able to repair the issue then he should (normally) make me a refund.

Jessica9_2

malchish wrote: »

2) Looking at the item in the presence of the consumer, if the fault is more obvious.

In fact, the retailer did not want despite of the fact that the fault was obvious.

Once again, I highlight the fact that he took the trainers back without giving a receipt and started being aggressive and talking with a loud voice.

OlliesDad

malchish wrote: »

No, not that simples. The product, unitl you received your refund, is your property, and they have no right to dictate what to do with your property. They must act reasonably. If you offer a local inspection - they will have no reason to refuse. However, in many cases no repairer will touch a potential legal dispute with a bargepole, they just won't give a written report.
Usually, the only valid inspection is the inspection ordered by the judge. For this to happen, you need to keep your evidence.

I find it highly unlikely that a court would deem it reasonable for a retailer to pay for a report over getting a free report from the manufacturer.

Who would pay for this report if no fault was found? Presumably you agree the retailer can demand the amount from the customer in this scenario.

OlliesDad

Jessica9 wrote: »

The retailer is wasting my time too : more than a month that I bought this trainers with my savings and cannot use them. I have called the police (to receive advice) after I have asked a question in this forum since nobody was answering to me. The retailer took the trainers but was refusing (and becoming aggressive) to provide a receipt acknowledging that I gave him the trainers back for inspection and description of the issue : this is a kind of theft. If for example I take trainers in the same retailer shop without paying and leave, obviously he will the right to call the police because I will be taking an asset from a certain from him without consent : it is the same for me.

I have called the police for information and they told me to call the Office of Fair Trading, after have provided a reference number.

The police officer equally told that normally after ONE week if the retailer was not able to repair the issue then he should (normally) make me a refund.

The difference would be that you would have the intention of permanently depriving the store of the goods.. the store does not have this intention.

Also, unless the police office was trained in consumer law (unlikely) they had no power to give you advice like they did. They cannot act as this is a civil issue, not a criminal one.

Jessica9_2

OlliesDad wrote: »

The difference would be that you would have the intention of permanently depriving the store of the goods.. the store does not have this intention.

Also, unless the police office was trained in consumer law (unlikely) they had no power to give you advice like they did. They cannot act as this is a civil issue, not a criminal one.

Oh, but trust me the advice I have received now is enough to proceed but trust me this will not be only for a refund...

Previously I said :

The police officer equally told that normally after ONE week if the retailer was not able to repair the issue then he should (normally) make me a refund.