Tricky Return

keyser666

shak2 wrote: »

I wasn't requesting replacement after they failed to provide a replacement I would have been happy if they just returned the faulty item back to me because the fault was cosmetic. That is what they refused to do and refunded me instead without my permission.

They do not need your permission to refund, repair or replace.

shaun_from_Africa

I would have been happy if they just returned the faulty item back to me

But as mentioned earlier, no company with any sense is going to return a known faulty electrical item as they could be opening themselves up to a load of trouble should something happen in the future.

Consider if a large retailer sold goods knowing that they were faulty just to cream interest off the top of holding money for a month while customers went through the returns process only to be refunded at the end.

Why consider that?
That is a totally different scenario and is illegal under the SOGA and the fraud act and is nothing like the case in hand.

shak2

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

It wasnt a cosmetic fault though, it was an electrical fault by your own admission.

Also, they dont need your permission to issue a refund. The choice is down to the retailer.

The fault was a cosmetic electrical fault (faulty light).

If anyone can find proof of this statement anywhere I will end this thread right here:
"they dont need your permission to issue a refund. The choice is down to the retailer."

halibut2209

Post 9.....

shak2

halibut2209 wrote: »

Post 9.....

That's doesn't say they can offer a refund. Just that I cannot request a replacement or repair if impossible.

Valli

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/what-do-i-do-if-i-have-a-faulty-product

From the above link -
"Your rights if an item is faulty

In the first six months from when you buy something, the onus is on the seller to prove it was of satisfactory quality when you received it.
If the seller simply says the problem must be due to something you've done, it's for them to prove that.
If something is not of satisfactory quality, you have a statutory right under the Sale of Goods Act, to a refund, have it replaced or repaired for free.
You can ask the retailer to do either, but it can normally choose to do whichever would be cheapest."

And this last line tells you that it's the retailer's choice - they can chose to do whatever would be cheapest (for them).

halibut2209

This all reminds me of an exchange from Babylon 5. If you'll indulge me...

- I believe I'm here now for a reason-
- And if the world says otherwise?
- Then the world is wrong!
- And Delenn is right? But perhaps the world is right and Delenn is wrong. Have you ever considered that? Have you?
- Yes. Sometimes.
- Then there may yet be hope for you.

Valli

And here in our very own Consumer Rights forum, the STICKY thread (I believe it's entitled 'Read me first') there is a wealth of advice and a plethora of useful links, our former Board Guide, Squeaky posted this
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=41489888&postcount=1

Your question is dealt with in the FAQs

wealdroam

shak2 wrote: »

If anyone can find proof of this statement anywhere I will end this thread right here:
"they dont need your permission to issue a refund. The choice is down to the retailer."

Read this Government webpage.

Particularly this bit:

If a repair or replacement isn’t practical
A trader doesn’t have to offer you a replacement or repair if:

it’s too costly for the trader it will take too long it will cause you significant inconvenience, eg you’ll be without a phone for months

If this happens, the trader should either:

offer you a partial refund if you return the item (to allow for the use you’ve had from it) let you keep the item and give you a reduction in price for the fault

powerful_Rogue

shak2 wrote: »

The fault was a cosmetic electrical fault (faulty light).

Its not cosmetic, its an electrical fault. They would not return an item to you which has an electrical fault. Imagine the come back if it was to catch fire.