Tricky Return

matttye

shak2 wrote: »

AH HA! I told you guys I was right!! so what you're saying is if I had asked for a reduction in price they were legally obliged to do that over giving a refund?

How on earth do you get that from what he said?

He's not talking Swahili, come on...!

shak2 wrote: »

But it was returned with their promise to replace it. Without that promise I would not have returned it and would have kept the faulty item. They made a promise (in writing!) and didn't keep it. That's why this doesn't feel right what they did...

Crappy service but not contrary to the SoGA. The breaking of a written promise may be contrary to some other law, I'm not sure.

Valli

shak2 wrote: »

AH HA! I told you guys I was right!! so what you're saying is if I had asked for a reduction in price they were legally obliged to do that over giving a refund?

Not saying that at all. You could have ASKED.

Didn't mean that your asking would have then obliged them to give you a refund though. Legally or otherwise.

As was made clear in the rest of the post.

In fact, because you are clearly skim reading, misinterpreting what you have read and/or are being deliberately obtuse...

shak2 wrote: »

AH HA! I told you guys I was right!! so what you're saying is if I had asked for a reduction in price they were legally obliged to do that over giving a refund?

NO I AM NOT SAYING THAT, HAD YOU ASKED FOR A REDUCTION, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN LEGALLY OBLIGED TO GIVE YOU A REDUCTION.

Clear?

shak2

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

What exact words did they write? Can you provide a screenshot of the email obviously leaving out any personal details.

Their exact words in the reply: "i will email you an RMA for replacement now"

Also about the other thing, I do not believe health and safety was an issue to prevent them returning the item to me. So I will leave that strand because returning my item, even if faulty, was what I wanted.

mije1983

shak2 wrote: »

So if there was no health and safety issue, and I asked them to return the item, then they were legally obliged to return it over giving a refund?

No. You probably would have only had a slim chance of this outcome once they had the item back in any respect but my point is you had 0% chance in this instance of getting it returned to you because of the nature of the fault.

As said before, and as the SoGA states, you as the buyer can request they do one instead of another, but they don't have to if it is impossible or too costly.

For example, you wanted the item returned to you and a partial refund as the item was faulty. Now look at it from the seller's point of view. They have already paid to have it returned, now they have to pay to send it back to you and also give you some money back. This is more costly to them than simply refunding you the payment, and then (probably) sending the item back to their supplier for credit.

powerful_Rogue

shak2 wrote: »

Their exact words in the reply: "i will email you an RMA for replacement now"

Also about the other thing, I do not believe health and safety was an issue to prevent them returning the item to me. So I will leave that strand because returning my item, even if faulty, was what I wanted.

Thats not a promise! Obviously by the time they received your item, they had no more replacements available.

Is there any reason why you keep ignoring this very simple question? Fourth time lucky.

So, a replacement is impossible and a repair is out of the question, returning the faulty item isnt an option due to health and safety - what remedy are you after?

matttye

shak2 wrote: »

Their exact words in the reply: "i will email you an RMA for replacement now"

Also about the other thing, I do not believe health and safety was an issue to prevent them returning the item to me. So I will leave that strand because returning my item, even if faulty, was what I wanted.

It might have been what you wanted but it wasn't one of the options available in the SoGA.

If a police officer sees me commit a criminal offence and then try to run away, he is legally obliged to arrest me. I might have wanted him to let me go but it doesn't mean that's what is going to happen.

We don't always get what we want.

wealdroam

shak2 wrote: »

...returning my item, even if faulty, was what I wanted.

No business is going to do that.

They then leave themselves open to the customer rejecting the goods a second time because they are faulty.

A silly place to go.

Valli

shak2 wrote: »

Their exact words in the reply: "i will email you an RMA for replacement now"

.

If you have been dealing with a large company it is entirely possible that the person to whom you spoke in Customer Services, believed, at the time of taking your call/email. that sufficient stock was available.

By the time your dodgy product was received and processed that was no longer the case. So you were refunded.

I don't see any 'promise' in that statement that you would defintely receive a replacement, although I agree it could be implied.

shak2

Valli wrote: »

Not saying that at all. You could have ASKED.

Didn't mean that your asking would have then obliged them to give you a refund though. Legally or otherwise.

BUT!!! as has now been burned into my eyes by you guys:
F4148C Reduction of purchase price or rescission of contract
(1)If section 48A above applies, the buyer may—

(a)require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods in question to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or

(b)rescind the contract with regard to those goods,

If I choose (a) and 48A applies, and (a) was possible, then they HAVE to do (a) right?

matttye

Something that might interest you by the way.

I used to be a Learndirect tutor and it was easier to tutor someone in Maths with Dyscalculia, than it is trying to get you to accept this. :wall: