How long do you legally have to check delivered goods?

18ME

We purchased 12 oak doors from B&Q back in February when they had a buy one get one half price offer on. The doors took from memory about a month to be delivered on their next day delivery. When the doors arrived I checked the outer packaging was ok and one of the doors was damaged (from what I could see outside) so that was sent back with the courier. They eventually replaced this door in the middle of May after chasing them a few times. Anyway all these doors were stored safely in the garage waiting to be installed by the chippy but today he's called me to say that one of the oak doors which has glass panels in it has a shattered pane, but none of the outer packaging was damaged at all and no evidence that it was damaged when delivered as you can't here any broken glass because it is still in one piece inside but I suppose its like a laminated car windscreen.

My partner called B&Q straight away today and has explained all this and all the lady in the call centre kept saying is that they cannot do anything as its gone more than 45 days. My partner explained to her that we didn't want to open all the doors and remove all the packaging until we were ready to have them hung by the chippy. Do we have any legal rights at all or do we have to buy a new door at full price as we wouldn't get the buy one get one half price again? I thought I'd read years ago somewhere in the Sale of Goods Act that you have a certain amount of time to check a product but I cannot find the info anywhere.

mije1983

I don't believe an actual time is stated in law. I think the word 'reasonable' is used so it's not cut and dried.

You could write to them and explain the situation but ultimately if they refuse to do anything your only recourse would be to sue them.

Then it would be down to a judge to determine if 4 months was ample time to check the doors given the circumstances. However you may find that the fact you had one damaged door which you noticed, but then didn't check the rest, will count against you.

18ME

I was half expecting bad news but thanks for clarifying. The one damaged door that we rejected was obvious from the outside as you could see the timber through the outer and inner packaging was damaged but all the rest seemed ok and no sound of broken glass. We simply lay them all neatly in the garage out of the way safely in their original packaging to protect them until we were ready to have them hung.

I'll email B&Q and try and put my case across but would have been great if I could have quoted some law or other.:(

bod1467

The law you need is the Sale of Goods Act.

http://sogahub.tradingstandards.gov.uk/explained

agrinnall

I'm sorry but if you had already had one damaged door delivered then it would surely make sense to properly examine the replacement when it turned up. While I think B&Q are a pretty awful organisation in this case you appear to have shot yourself in the foot.

InsideInsurance

The law doesnt specify the length of time however additional guidance says that generally you are talking a few days however there can be extenuating circumstances that may make this period longer. The example often given is someone buying a lawnmower in December who clearly isnt going to be used until spring.

18ME

It wasn't the replacement door that was damaged it was one of the original ones. We had 12 assorted of the same design but different sizes. Only two were glazed which were for the lounge to dining room, the rest were all solid wood.
I've sent this email to B&Q below. I'm crossing my fingers but not holding my breath.

Dear Sir/Madam,

We ordered and paid for 12 x assorted size 4 panel shaker oak doors on 18th February, order no: 84991426. We didn’t receive our order for a number of weeks and when we did receive the order one damaged door that we rejected was obvious from the outside as you could see the timber through the outer and inner packaging was damaged but all the rest of the doors had no damaged outer or inner packaging that we could see and no sound of broken glass. We simply lay them all neatly and safely in the garage out of the way in their original packaging in order to protect them until we received the replacement door and were ready to have them hung by a carpenter. The final replacement door didn’t arrive until sometime mid May after chasing up a few times, and by this time we had to wait for the carpenter as he had got booked up.

We managed to book the carpenter this week to have all of our new doors hung and today one of the two glazed doors was found to be broken after opening the outer packaging. The glass looks like a shattered car windscreen and still in one piece hence why it wasn’t noticed upon delivery. My partner called the 0800 359 5516 number straight away to inform of the damaged door and spoke to Gale. We wanted a replacement for the damaged door sent but Gale refused this and said that we would need to buy a new door and that she wasn’t prepared to offer any sort of replacement because it had been longer than 45 days since we took delivery.

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 states that a reasonable amount of time is allowed in order to fully check the goods and in this particular case having to wait until all our doors were delivered and then arranging with a professional to fit them before they could be checked fully and in the meantime kept safely in their original packaging, is a “reasonable amount of time”. Therefore I would like to request a replacement for the damaged door below.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4 Panel Shaker Oak Veneer Clear Glazed Internal Door, (H)1981x(W)686mm - F
EAN: 5397007097962[/FONT]

unholyangel

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The law doesnt specify the length of time however additional guidance says that generally you are talking a few days however there can be extenuating circumstances that may make this period longer. The example often given is someone buying a lawnmower in December who clearly isnt going to be used until spring.

Link?

The only additional guidance I've seen makes it clear that short time limit on claims is an unfair contract term - especially if it could be used to deprive the consumer of their rights.

In fact, even companies saying damaged deliveries must be checked within 7 days have been made to change it, either by deleting it entirely or changing it to "you have a reasonable time to inspect the goods and notify us of any damage" or "you should notify us of any damage as soon as reasonably possible".

InsideInsurance

http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc317_Consumer_Remedies_Faulty_Goods.pdf

1.23 in the document says 30 days should be the norm but in certain circumstances it may be longer, eg the lawnmower bought in November

Where I saw a less legal version of this I cannot remember, think it was on the CAB or Which? website but same principles.

unholyangel

InsideInsurance wrote: »

http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc317_Consumer_Remedies_Faulty_Goods.pdf

1.23 in the document says 30 days should be the norm but in certain circumstances it may be longer, eg the lawnmower bought in November

Where I saw a less legal version of this I cannot remember, think it was on the CAB or Which? website but same principles.

AFAIK, that hasnt been implemented yet. It was part of the consumer rights bill that was being implemented in stages.

Indeed in the document you linked it states it is a report, on what it feels should happen in the changes being made. Its not guidance as such, its just a report of their recommendations/observations on the current law.

However I wouldnt class a month as "a few days"

InsideInsurance

unholyangel wrote: »

AFAIK, that hasnt been implemented yet. It was part of the consumer rights bill that was being implemented in stages.

As I say, it isnt the original place I saw it. It was on the CAB, OFT, TS, Which? Type site and related to SOGA - they just happen to have used the same example of a mower

However I wouldnt class a month as "a few days"

Nor would I, the original source I saw it on didnt mention 30 days.