Tricky Return

harrys_dad

It was faulty, they refunded your money. Some people are never satisfied.

Geodark

shak2 wrote: »

But I didn't reject them, I wanted to keep it but it was faulty!!

Also, the Sales of goods act only says replacement or repair not refund...

You returned the item back to them - therefore you rejected them - they offered a remedy to put you back to where you were before you ordered them - they have done everything right. I can see how you might want the item still, but they have abided by soga.

shak2

Geodark wrote: »

You returned the item back to them - therefore you rejected them

But it was returned because it was faulty, not because I didn't want it! I did want it. Also, the fault developed after the purchase (on day 5/6), does this affect the claim?

marliepanda

shak2 wrote: »

But it was returned because it was faulty, not because I didn't want it! I did want it. Also, the fault developed after the purchase (on day 5/6), does this affect the claim?

No it does not

powerful_Rogue

shak2 wrote: »

But it was returned because it was faulty, not because I didn't want it! I did want it. Also, the fault developed after the purchase (on day 5/6), does this affect the claim?

Your clutching a straws now. The law is very clear and the retailer has complied with it.

The act of returning the item because it was fauly is classed as rejecting the goods. Had you kept the item with the fault, that would have been classed as acceptance.

If they dont have any stock to replace the item with, all they are left to do is refund you.

giantmutantbroccoli

This is rapidly becoming my new favourite site:
http://sogahub.tradingstandards.gov.uk/
It's the Sale of Goods Act, explained in nice simple language for retailers - but useful for customers too.

OP, I think you're getting too hung up on the rejection/acceptance. It really doesn't matter whether you accepted or rejected the goods, either way the company still has the right to give you a refund:

Faulty goods, no acceptance If the item does not conform to contract (is faulty ) for any of the reasons mentioned previously, and the customer has not accepted the goods, the law says the customer is entitled to

• reject the goods and claim a full refund, or
• request a repair or replacement if that is the customer's preferred option.

As the retailer, you can offer a repair, a replacement or a credit note, but you cannot insist on any one of these. It is the customer's right to receive a full refund in these circumstances.

Faulty goods that have been accepted
If the item does not conform to contract (is faulty ) for any of the reasons outlined and the customer has accepted the goods, the law says the customer is entitled to claim a repair or replacement of the goods in the first instance.

If either a repair or replacement is not possible, or the cost is greater than the value of the item ( disproportionately costly ), or the customer claims either option is taking an unreasonable amount of time or is causing unreasonable inconvenience, the customer is then entitled to

• keep the goods and claim a price reduction from the retailer to compensate them for the fault in the goods - this would be the difference between the value of the product in perfect condition and the value of the product in the faulty condition, or
• return the goods and rescind the contract . This would mean that the customer returns the goods and you provide a partial refund, calculated to reflect the benefit the customer has received from the product.

You haven't owned the item long enough to count as having accepted it, but regardless of whether you've accepted it or not, you returned it to the company. It doesn't matter if the company initially said they could repair or replace it, they are legally allowed to give you a full refund instead if the repair or replacement is no longer economical, or possible.
It's not their fault that everybody else's stock is more expensive!

shak2

giantmutantbroccoli wrote: »

"the customer is then entitled to...keep goods or return goods and rescind contract"

Doesn't this mean it's my decision and when I asked them to return the faulty item they should have returned it and not just processed a refund without my permission?

shak2

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

The act of returning the item because it was fauly is classed as rejecting the goods.

Do you have a link to anywhere that says this?

It originally worked, and the fault appeared on the 5th/6 day

greyteam1959

Sometimes reading some of these threads on here give me a right FLAMIN HEADACHE !!!
:mad::mad::mad:

Valli

We know it originally worked; you, however chose to send it back.

They don't have another to hand to send you; they have refunded you.

That's it. Game over.

Sale of Goods Act. Enjoy!

(Blue text indicates a link)