Sports Direct refusing refund for a faulty Squash Racket

jasear

I bought a squash racket on the 12/12/13 and used it twice. Yesterday (19/12/13) during a game I hit a ball and the string snapped which means I will have to get the racket restrung.

I went to the store the lady at the till was sympathetic but didnt have the authorisation to do a return so called the store manager. The store Manager refused to take it back as she said the item was sold in perfect condition so she doesnt know what happened. Then she said that they have a policy that they dont do returns on rackets with broken strings. I asked her to show me this policy in writing and she refused. She then said its somewhere in the head office and I would need to ask them to send this policy to me in writing. I recorded the entire conversation.

Researching my statuary rights I came across a few things. First of all since I am returning the item with a fault within 6 months I dont have to prove there was a fault when i bought it as that is assumed to be the case according to the [FONT=&quot]"The Sale And Supply of Goods To Consumers Regulations 2002" [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot].

Then there is that "Sad Fart" thing

I asked her to look at the racket and showed her how the strings had clearly snapped under tension rather than a clean cut which suggests it was not accidental damage or damage caused by me but an inherent fault in the racket. To cut the long story short, I got her to sign a piece of paper confirming that on todays date she refused to take back the racket with broken string.

Am I crazy? Is it unreasonable for me to expect to buy a £40+ Squash racket ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]Dunlop Apex Power) originally priced at over £100 and expect the strings to last for more than a week? I have never broken the strings on a squash racket before and this one snapped in a week. Are squash racket strings exempt from my statuary rights? Please honestly advise if I have a leg to stand on. Common sense tells me that they should have taken it back without any question as it is obviously not of acceptable standard.

Please tell me what I should do? Thanks for your help in advance.
[/FONT]

DevCoder

The strings would be classed as consumables wouldn't they?

jasear

krisdorey wrote: »

The strings would be classed as consumables wouldn't they?

Not sure about that but even if they are, its acceptable that they get consumed after 1 week? Surely that cannot be right?

bris

jasear wrote: »

Not sure about that but even if they are, its acceptable that they get consumed after 1 week? Surely that cannot be right?

Yes it is right, strings are classed as consumables and they break, this is why you see tennis and squash players with bags with 6 racquets in them. The shop don't know what puishment the racquet has taken.

jasear

bris wrote: »

Yes it is right, strings are classed as consumables and they break, this is why you see tennis and squash players with bags with 6 racquets in them. The shop don't know what puishment the racquet has taken.

This is why I stated the following:

Researching my statuary rights I came across a few things. First of all since I am returning the item with a fault within 6 months I dont have to prove there was a fault when i bought it as that is assumed to be the case according to the [FONT="]"The Sale And Supply of Goods To Consumers Regulations 2002" [/FONT][FONT="]. [/FONT]

Hence it is not for me to prove it didnt take any punishment it is for the shop to prove I gave it abnormal amount of punishment.

Seriously, what could I have done to it in 1 week to break the string that could be blamed on me? How can it be acceptable for a racket string to snap in 1 week? They are supposed to last years, I have never had a string snap on a racket before and I have played Squash for years.

DevCoder

You are slightly missing the point

The strings are consumables, if the racket broke in the first 6 months then there would no issue.

This is not the case with consumables.

jasear

krisdorey wrote: »

You are slightly missing the point

The strings are consumables, if the racket broke in the first 6 months then there would no issue.

This is not the case with consumables.

So if I buy a printer and the ink cartridge develops a fault within a week I cant do anything since it is a consumable item? Would they not give me a replacement ink cartridge?

In that case I am happy for them to restring the racket. Surely, it is not acceptable for a racket string to snap in a week? Am I missing something? The consumable is part of the product they sold me. Surely it must adhere to some quality standard?

OlliesDad

krisdorey wrote: »

You are slightly missing the point

The strings are consumables, if the racket broke in the first 6 months then there would no issue.

This is not the case with consumables.

As far as I am aware consumables are covered under the Sales of Goods act just as much as any other product. Obviously the length of time that it is reasonable to expect it to last is reduced, it should still be of satisfactory quality.

Can you point out where in the SOGA it says otherwise?

jasear

I dont understand why we have to break the product down into different components so that we can "excuse" a lack of quality. You could argue the grip of the racket is also a consumable so if it is not of adequate quality has not been fitted properly and it comes off then I have no rights to expect and demand better?

As far as I am concerned the racket is 1 product that has several components (consumable or not) and it is absolutely fair for me to expect any part of it to function for more than a week?

Without a string the racket cannot function. In other words I bought a product that only functioned for 1 week and I am being told thats acceptable.

How on earth is that acceptable? I spent over £40 and I have a racket that does not function after 1 WEEK.

Sorry I am really annoyed and angry about this.

A PC has many consumable parts, if one of them blew up after 1 week and the PC was non functional would you just accept that its tough luck and you must buy a new PC or get the defective part repaired yourself?

paddyrg

PC parts and racket strings are not the same thing, and I think you know that deep inside. I totally get you being upset, but consumables are not the same as the main item. For instance, batteries in a toy car or laces in boots.

I would say you may have a decent case for a new stringing though, as opposed to a new racket. Sports Direct though are cheap and cheerful, and not known for customer service - you may have a fight on your hands.

wealdroam

jasear wrote: »

I dont understand why we have to break the product down into different components so that we can "excuse" a lack of quality. You could argue the grip of the racket is also a consumable so if it is not of adequate quality has not been fitted properly and it comes off then I have no rights to expect and demand better?

As far as I am concerned the racket is 1 product that has several components (consumable or not) and it is absolutely fair for me to expect any part of it to function for more than a week?

Without a string the racket cannot function. In other words I bought a product that only functioned for 1 week and I am being told thats acceptable.

How on earth is that acceptable? I spent over £40 and I have a racket that does not function after 1 WEEK.

Sorry I am really annoyed and angry about this.

A PC has many consumable parts, if one of them blew up after 1 week and the PC was non functional would you just accept that its tough luck and you must buy a new PC or get the defective part repaired yourself?

This is exactly the discussion you should be having with Sports Direct... with their head office if their local branch manager won't help.

Yes of course SD must prove that your usage has caused the string to break.

If they fail to do that and fail to provide a remedy then you need to consider writing a letter before action.

For info on an LBA, and a sample, see here:

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_taking_action_e/consumer_legal_actions_e/consumer_going_to_court_e/before_you_take_someone_to_court/step_one_write_a_letter_before_action.htm