help to decipher

coldfire0101

Yes they probably do work on other people, but they don't work with my ears and I feel I should not be stuck with an expensive set of headphones that I could not try before I bought them

coldfire0101

The company have refused any refund under the distantly seller for hygiene reasons even tho there was no mention of headphones not being refunded on the website

ThumbRemote

coldfire0101 wrote: »

The company have refused any refund under the distantly seller for hygiene reasons even tho there was no mention of headphones not being refunded on the website

There is no exception for hygiene within the DSRs so they cannot refuse on those grounds. Although exercising your rights under the DSRs would rely on you having contacted them within about a week after delivery.

neilmcl

coldfire0101 wrote: »

The company have refused any refund under the distantly seller for hygiene reasons even tho there was no mention of headphones not being refunded on the website

As above, these will be covered under the DSRs. Did you attempt to cancel within 7 working days from delivery?

unholyangel

ThumbRemote wrote: »

There is no exception for hygiene within the DSRs so they cannot refuse on those grounds. Although exercising your rights under the DSRs would rely on you having contacted them within about a week after delivery.

Providing the company informed the OP in durable means about their cancellation rights etc.

If they didn't then OP might have up to 3 months and 7 working days.

coldfire0101

I contacted the company the following evening after I they arrived, I've also looked over their t&c's and there is no mention about hygiene in there either
Should I pursue a refund through the DSR?

JimmyTheWig

Here's an example of _not_ mitigating your losses...

Customer: Hello, these earphones are faulty. Can I have a refund?
Seller: Of course you can, sir. Send them back to us and we'll refund them plus your postage costs.
Customer: That's not good enough. I want them to be picked up personally by David Beckham in a horse drawn carriage.
Seller: We can't arrange that, sir, sorry.
Customer: Well, in that case I'll take you to court and you will have to pay the court costs.

That isn't mitigating your losses because you are adding on court costs when there was no need. The seller was perfectly reasonable and it didn't need to go to court.


I guess what they could mean in your case is that you have a duty to mitigate your losses as in if you get the most expensive lawyer in the land to argue your case for you that would be excessive.
Or they are just trying to use fancy words to through you off claiming.

If the goods are not fit for purpose (I don't know if that is the case from what you have said or not) and the seller is refusing to do anything about it then small claims court is a perfectly reasonable step to take and doesn't mean that you aren't mitigating your losses.

bod1467

If you contacted the seller about this issue and requested a refund within 7 working days of delivery, then DSRs apply and they MUST refund you within 30 days - regardless of whether or not the goods have been returned.

Of course almost NO seller will refund without the goods being back, irrespective of what the law says. You may be liable for the return cost (depending on what their T&Cs say).

As said previously, there is NO get-out clause for hygiene within the DSRs. The link below may be helpful ... yes it is about pet products but the argument is the same.

http://www.seqlegal.com/questions/distance-selling-and-hygiene

The next link is also useful:

http://dshub.tradingstandards.gov.uk/dsrexplained

coldfire0101

i have forwarded this information about DSR's on to the company and again requested a refund under the DSR

ValHaller

coldfire0101 wrote: »

I contacted the company the following evening after I they arrived, I've also looked over their t&c's and there is no mention about hygiene in there either
Should I pursue a refund through the DSR?

No. DSR's are a no fault route to a refund. This is generally straightforward, but more difficult in the case of goods such as headphones where - as in your case - the supplier can try wriggling out of accepting a return on grounds of hygiene.

Your actual reason for return is 'Not fit for purpose'. You have a reasonable expectation that you can wear them while jogging. Assuming you are wearing them correctly, the fact that they fall out means that they are not fit for purpose.