Faulty dolls house

turn3r

I purchased a dolls house in August for my daughter's Christmas which required assembling. When it arrived I checked all the parts and one bit was broken, I contacted the company who said they would send a new part. Once I received an email saying the part had been dispatched we build the house and began decorating it. Two week later I emailed company as had not received part and they then emailed me saying the part could no longer be supplied. If the company cannot send me a replacement part before Christmas I cannot give her the gift, so should they offer me an alternative house? I am not very sure of my rights and it was an expensive purchase and I am not very happy about having to spend more money on another house.

agrinnall

What have they offered? The Sale of Goods Act allows them to offer their choice of refund, repair or replace (you can express a preference but they have the final decision). It sounds like repair is out, so unless they are able and willing to offer a replacement then a full refund seems to be the best you can expect (the refund should include the cost of returning the dolls house and anything that you paid for the original delivery).

turn3r

Thanks for reply. They have offered nothing. They state in their emails that they have no spares and are unable to tell me when or even if they will have spares again. I emailed back several times and asked what they were going to do and they never reply!

wealdroam

turn3r wrote: »

Thanks for reply. They have offered nothing. They state in their emails that they have no spares and are unable to tell me when or even if they will have spares again. I emailed back several times and asked what they were going to do and they never reply!

Then you need to email them telling them what you expect them to do.
That might be for them to provide a full refund and collect the thing from you at their cost with no inconvenience to you.

ThumbRemote

I presume you contacted the retailer, not the manufacturer? You just say "the company" so it's not clear which.

InsideInsurance

agrinnall wrote: »

What have they offered? The Sale of Goods Act allows them to offer their choice of refund, repair or replace (you can express a preference but they have the final decision).

The retailer only gets the choice of how to resolve the complaint once the goods are accepted.

On the basis the OP found the issue as they unpacked it for the first time then there is the potential option to reject the goods instead in which case the OP can insist on a full refund.

The question would be if the fact they have gone on to use the item would be considered acceptance of the defect or if the lack of response from the initial complaint means the window for reject it is still open.

Certainly cases on other consumer sites do state that accepting an initial attempt at repairing doesnt constitute acceptance and that the person could subsequently still reject the goods if the initial repair attempt failed.

shaun_from_Africa

InsideInsurance wrote: »

On the basis the OP found the issue as they unpacked it for the first time then there is the potential option to reject the goods instead in which case the OP can insist on a full refund.

The question would be if the fact they have gone on to use the item would be considered acceptance of the defect or if the lack of response from the initial complaint means the window for reject it is still open.

Don't forget that acceptance is deemed to have occurred if one of two scenarios occurs.
1/ When the buyer has had the goods for a reasonable time and does not reject them, or
2/ "when the goods have been delivered to him and he does any act in relation to them which is inconsistent with the ownership of the seller" (SOGA 35.1)

Using the goods might not mean acceptance has occurred but it's possible that building and decorating the dolls house may imply acceptance, thus losing the right of rejection.

unholyangel

Regarding building/decorating being seen as acceptance....depends what decorating means. If its just using things provided/placing furniture then its unlikely as its how the product is meant to be - where if OP has perhaps painted it colours of their own choice which were not part of the purchase then it would constitute acceptance as they have modified them.

However if a repair/replacement is impossible.....then a refund would be the next step unless it is something more minor like a piece of furniture in which case a reduction in price might be more appropriate - to account for the diminished value or asking the retailer to meet the costs of sourcing a replacement (if possible).

InsideInsurance

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Don't forget that acceptance is deemed to have occurred if one of two scenarios occurs.

I not only didnt forget but raised the point myself.

The OP says they raised the issue of the broken part first and only started building it after being told a replacement was being sent to them. I think there is a reasonable case for saying the item hasnt been accepted because it was based on this miss information coming from the vendor.

agrinnall

II and shaun, I don't disagree with either of you, but in this case the point you are making is not really relevant. The OP doesn't want a full refund, they want a doll's house - a repair seems to be out of the question, so they want a replacement. I'm doubtful whether they can insist on this, so as I originally stated the choice between replacement and refund is in the hands of the retailer.