Urgent. Please help. Sofa deliverd with unseen manufacturing fault. Consumer rights

sniggings

contact your bank, keep things simple, list the reasons why you have rejected the item and the dates when you asked the seller for a refund and when you rejected the item, do not add anything more than the details , no talking about husband not seeing the fault and you are not trained etc etc, all you have done there is score an own goal.

If that doesn't work then it's small claims court.

It's very simple, a faulty good was never accepted by you, you ask for a refund, they have refused, that's all your bank should need to know. Don't get bogged down in details...especially not talk of hubby not noticing the fault

oldoakey

If you can post up a picture of the arm where its out of shape I will take a close look for you. Also take a picture of the leg so I can see if its out if square.

I have sold furniture for over 20 years now and have never had a frame twist as you mentioned in your earlier post. Do the sofas recline or are they fixed, do you know who the manufacturer is and the model name.

Is the covering material really leather as there are many types of false leather (Bicast) that some companies sell as if its true leather

System

Hi wealdroam,

Please can you advise further?

I try to get this on one A4 but it takes two A4. As the claim is for two sofas, would this be acceptable or have I got it wrong and need to take chunks of the descriptive literature (Waffle) out.

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number/Visa Debit Card: ………... Ref: Visa Chargeback.

I am writing to request that under your Chargeback rules you reimburse me the value of £2,298, as full payment for two Vintage Leather Black Paxt sofas. Consisting of a three seater sofa (£1,149), two seater sofa (£1,080) plus £40.00 delivery. I paid by Visa Debit Card to For… Sofa LTD/ ta The Ches…….. Company, Salford. Manchester. 50% deposit (£1,149) on 15.09.2014, final 50% payment (£1,149) on 07.10.2014 a total of £2,298. (Although their invoice states £2,299. 14.09.2014).

My claim is made on the grounds that I explicitly rejected both sofas, as they are both faulty in the following ways:

Three seat sofa, delivered 06.10.2014
There is excessive movement in the three seat frame in the far corner where the seat base meets the back base, where the corners join. For example, when I slide the sofa out (say, to clean under it) by placing one hand on the back of the sofa and another hand under the arm bolster it suddenly lifts loosely and a lot more than expected, about three inch off the floor. However, when I go to the opposite side of the sofa to carry out the same duty this arm does not lift at all and stays solid to the ground as expected from a new sofa. I expect better from a new sofa and feel that this has worsened over time for instance, when demonstrating to the technician. Due to stress caused by both of the faults and the attitude of the company the sofas are covered and unused to date. I reported this fault to the company within two hours of delivery. I could not provide photographs as it is an unseen fault. I exlpained that the sofas are unused and covered due to the stress caused by their company. All contacts including reported faults has been completed through email.

"The Ches…….. Sofa Company" response : To wait for a call from a sofa technician. I received a call and booked their earliest offer, an abysmal nine days later. I contacted The Ches……. Sofa Company, by email and explained my distress however an earlier date could not be made. I felt this was too long to have to wait for a technician.


Two seat sofa
Three days after delivery a further fault appeared, however this was the two seat sofa. It creaks very, very, loudly, when seating, when getting comfortable and again when standing. This unseen, embarrassing fault was not apparent on the day of delivery. This has worsened over time for instance, when the technician sat on it during the report. I expect better quality from a new sofa. I reported this fault immediately with a rejection notice by email………… The notice stated, I would like to explicitly say that I am rejecting the goods under the sales of goods act and sales of goods act (amended). You have requested for a technician to call and I have agreed as you are entitled to inspect the goods to ensure that they are indeed faulty and this isn't either (a) normal or (b) damage that I have caused.

"The Ches…….. So.a Co..any" reply: We only offer repair, replacement and refund as policy, as stated in our Terms.

I/Customer reply: Your Terms do not apply to me as I have rejected the goods within hours of delivery, hence, I explicitly reject the goods under the sales of goods act and the sales of goods act (amended).

Technician Visit 23.10.2014

The technician arrived with paperwork to check the three seat sofa fault. To my dismay there was nothing about the two seat sofa's fault, therefore I explained the situation, as a result the technician checked and reported the two seat sofa.
During the Report I noticed two further faults and immediately brought these to the technician’s attention.
Further fault 1-The two seat sofa has a twisted bowed front leg which noticeable on meticulous inspection, or by a qualified persons trained eye. Due to the stress caused by the company, the long wait for the technician and the sofas being covered and unused I feel it is acceptable that the fault was not noticed at a sooner date.-

Further fault 2 -The three seat sofa’s right hand front arm fascia, the part that turns under the arm bolster, tapers away much sooner compared to the left hand facing arm fascia. This has studs all around it that curve and drop into a tear-drop shape which is expected to slightly droop downwards (A distinctive Tear-drop Style in the chesterfield range) however it it does not. As a result, the sofa is odd when stood facing it in a central position from afar however, if you viewed it from a slight right or left position the fault may not be as apparent to some people. I explicitly rejected the sofa previously to finding this further fault. I expect better from a new sofa and if this was repaired, say to sell as a second’s product in the future, then stud marks, staple marks and scratches, due to the studs having to be removed would be left in the leather. Due to the stress caused by the company, the long wait for the technician and the sofas being covered and unused for a long amount of time, I feel is to blame for the faults not being noticed at a sooner date.

I understand that variations may differ slightly from a company’s online image of a sofa or indeed any product say, batches of leather, colour, texture, thicker or thinner arms, higher or lower based arms due to the sofas being handmade which is normally a pleasant designer experience, as no two products will ever be the same. However, to have produced a single product with two odd fascia’s that do not twin with each other on the same actual product is nothing less than a rejected seconds product, which is unacceptable for a new sofa. For example, the arm fascia’s on The Ches…….. Sofa Company’s online image twin with each other however this may differ slightly from, say my two seat sofa, however both of these fascias still twin with each other. I have the exact online replica, vintage black leather, chrome studs and black feet- nothing more and nothing less.


Both new faults were reported by the technician who also provided photographic evidence. Therefore Knowing that the technician had registered the faults, I did not report them until four days later, when returning from a short break - by email.

The Technician’s Report (Please see Page 3)

I have been unable to resolve my complaint with the supplier.

I look forward to a full and prompt response to this letter within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

………………………………………………………..

meer53

The goods need to be returned before a chargeback for faulty goods can be actioned.

In my opinion theres a bit too much detail in the letter regarding the faults. Best to keep it short and to the point. Bullet points are good. Take the emotion out also. Distress, stress, abysmal etc.

Stephers

I'm having the same problem with DFS they have sent two service managers to my home to look at at a 3 week old suite . The first left saying there was nothing wrong . The second wants to put extra stuffing and foam into it as well as putting straps under the seating which has caved in despite minimal use. They have a policy of just repair they do not replace or refund. They only replace parts .

I will go all the way to the ombudsman if I have to :mad:

neilmcl

Stephers wrote: »

I'm having the same problem with DFS they have sent two service managers to my home to look at at a 3 week old suite . The first left saying there was nothing wrong . The second wants to put extra stuffing and foam into it as well as putting straps under the seating which has caved in despite minimal use. They have a policy of just repair they do not replace or refund. They only replace parts .

I will go all the way to the ombudsman if I have to :mad:

What ombudsman. If you want to "go all the way" then you will have to take them to the small claims court.

hollydays

The furniture ombudsman?

System

Hi
Thanks for the advice.
Can you advise further, is my letter to the Bank OK?
I've got it down to two A4 with further reading including the technician report, invoice as evidence.

Thank you

Account number/Visa Debit Card: …………… Ref: Visa Chargeback.

Dear Sir/ Madam,

I am writing to request that under your Chargeback rules you reimburse me the value of £2,298, as full payment for two Vintage Leather Black Pax... sofas. Consisting of a three seat sofa (£1,149), two seat sofa (£1,080) plus £40.00 delivery. I paid by Visa Debit Card to For.... Sofa LTD/ ta The Chest..... Company, Salford. Manchester. 50% deposit (£1,149) on 15.09.2014, final 50% payment (£1,149) on 07.10.2014 a total of £2,298. (Although their invoice states £2,299. 14.09.2014). (Please see page 3 & 4)

My claim is made on the grounds that I have explicitly rejected both sofas as they are both faulty in the following ways:

•Three seat sofa- excessive movement in the frame, mostly in the far corner where the seat base meets the back bottom base, where the corners join. For example, when I slide the sofa out say, to clean under it, by placing one hand on the back of the sofa and another hand under the arm bolster, it suddenly lifts a lot more than expected (about three inch off the floor). However, when carrying out the same act from the opposite side of the sofa it does not lift and stays solid to the ground as expected. Fault reported within two hours of delivery. No photographs were taken due to it being an unseen fault. Company is aware that the sofas are covered and unused, due to the stress caused by their company. To date all contacts since delivery and including the reported faults have been completed through email.

•THE Company’s response: Wait for a call from a sofa technician. Received, accepted earliest offer which was nine days later. I contacted The Company (sofa)by email for a sooner date due to inconvenience,none were offered so I accepted.

•Two seat sofa- Also showed a fault. It creaks very, loudly, when seating and getting comfortable and again when standing. This unseen fault was not apparent on the day of delivery and was reported immediately. The fault has worsened and will further worsen if used for instance, the technician sat, pressed and pushed over and over during the inspection report (Both Batch Labels have different signatures on them).

I sent a rejection notice for both sofas, one by email and a formal written letter by registered post ” I would like to explicitly say that I am rejecting the goods under the sales of goods act and sales of goods act (amended). You have requested for a technician to call and I have agreed as you are entitled to inspect the goods to ensure that they are indeed faulty and this isn't either (a) normal or (b) damage that I have caused”.

•The Che…….Company reply: We only offer repair, replacement and refund as policy, as stated in our Terms.
•Customer reply: Your Terms do not apply to me as I have rejected the goods within hours of delivery, hence, I explicitly reject the goods under the sales of goods act and the sales of goods act (amended).
•Technician Visit, 23.10.2014 - The technician arrived with paperwork to check the three seat sofa’s fault, however with no mention of two seat sofa's fault. I explained the situation, as a result the technician checked and reported the two seat sofa’s fault, in addition to two further faults, which were discovered after spending extra time in the room with the sofas uncovered, to accompany the technician.I noticed the two further faults just he began the inspection and immediately brought these to the technician’s attention.

•Further fault 1-The two seat sofa has got a twisted bowed front left leg, which is noticeable on meticulous inspection, or by a qualified persons trained eye.
•Further fault 2 -The three seat sofa’s right hand front arm fascia, the part that turns under the arm bolster, tapers away much sooner compared to the left hand facing arm fascia. These have chrome studs placed all around which are expected to curve and slightly droop downwards into a tear-drop shape (A distinctive tear-drop style that is recognisable in Chesterfield sofas) however, on one arm fascia it does droop it rises upwards upwards. As a result, the sofa is odd when stood back facing it in a central position however, if viewed from a slight right or left position the fault may not be as apparent to some people. If repaired, say to sell as a second’s product in the future, then stud marks, staple marks and scratches will be left in the leather due to the studs being removed. Further faults were not noticed sooner as the sofas have been covered and unused, due to stress caused by the company alongside an inconvenienced nine day wait for the technician to arrive.

•Both new faults were reported by the technician with photographic evidence. I did not report them until later, when returning from a break for completeness.
•I requested and ordered the exact on-line replica, vintage black leather sofas, chrome studs and black feet- nothing more and nothing less. However, I understand that variations may differ slightly from a company’s on-line image if they are say, batches of leather, colour, texture, thicker/thinner, higher/ lower arms, etc, due to being handmade. However, this should be a pleasant designer experience, as the customer may not want any two products to ever be the same. However, to produce one product with two odd fascia’s that do not twin or match with each other on the same actual single product, is nothing less than a rejected seconds. For example, on the company’s on-line image the arm fascias twin with each other and may differ from my two seat sofa, however the two seat sofa’s arm fascia’s twin with each other as expected.

•The Technician’s Report 28.10.2014 (Please see Page 5-8 Report with Photographic evidence).

I have been unable to resolve my complaint with the supplier.

I look forward to a full and prompt response to this letter within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,
......................................

wealdroam

My letter would somewhat shorter.

Dear Sir/ Madam,
Account number/Visa Debit Card: …………… Ref: Visa Chargeback.

I am writing to request that under your Chargeback rules you reimburse me the value of £2,298, as full payment for two sofas. A three seat sofa (£1,149), a two seat sofa (£1,080) and a £40.00 delivery charge. I paid by Visa Debit Card to Forest Sofa LTD/ ta The Chesterfield Company, Salford. Manchester. 50% deposit (£1,149) on 15.09.2014, final 50% payment (£1,149) on 07.10.2014 a total of £2,298. I enclose a copy of the invoice/receipts.

These sofas were delivered to me on <dd mmm yyyy>.

My claim is made on the grounds that I have explicitly rejected both sofas as they are both faulty in the following ways:

•Three seat sofa- excessive movement in the frame. Fault reported within two hours of delivery. Company is aware that the sofas are covered and unused whilst a resolution is sought.

•Two seat sofa- Three days after delivery the two seat sofa also showed a fault. It creaks very, loudly, when seating and getting comfortable and again when standing. This fault was not apparent on the day of delivery but was reported immediately it was noticed on <dd mmm yyyy>. The fault has worsened.

I sent a rejection notice for both sofas, one by email and a formal written letter by registered post, stating ”I would like to explicitly say that I am rejecting the goods under the sales of goods act and sales of goods act (amended). You have requested for a technician to call and I have agreed”.

•The Che…….Company reply: We only offer repair, replacement and refund as policy, as stated in our Terms.

•Customer reply: Your Terms cannot remove my statutory rights under The Sale of Goods Act. I have a statutory right to reject the goods, and I have done so within hours of delivery.

•Technician Visit, 23.10.2014 - The technician arrived and checked the sofas.Whilst the technician was checking, I noticed the two further faults and immediately brought these to his attention. These further faults were not noticed sooner as the sofas have been covered and unused since delivery.

•Further fault 1-The two seat sofa has got a noticeable twisted bowed front left leg.

•Further fault 2 -The three seat sofa’s right hand front arm fascia is different to the left hand facing arm fascia. As a result, the sofa is odd when stood back facing it in a central position. If repaired, then stud marks, staple marks and scratches would be left in the leather due to the studs being removed.

•The technician noted these two newly discovered faults, and I reported them to the company for completeness.

I do have photos of the sofas showing the faults, a copy of the technician's report and a complete set of emails sent between the seller and myself, and of course if you would like to see these then I will happily send them to you.

I have been unable to resolve my complaint with the supplier.

I look forward to a full and prompt response to this letter, ideally within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,
......................................

I imagine their response will be to send you a form to complete.

Also consider meer53's earlier response:

meer53 wrote: »

The goods need to be returned before a chargeback for faulty goods can be actioned.

powerful_Rogue

hollydays wrote: »

The furniture ombudsman?

http://www.thefurnitureombudsman.org/