Damaged goods in delivery

Hintza

ThumbRemote wrote: »

So your claim that "48 hours sounds more than reasonable" is indeed bizarre.

It certainly is in respect of the fridge.

As for the CD you will no doubt have your claim rejected (you might not). Then you will have to decide whether it is worth fighting.

unholyangel

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284426/oft311.pdf

2.4.3 Prompt notification of complaints is desirable because it encourages
successful resolution and is therefore to be encouraged. But taking away all
rights to redress is liable to be considered an over-severe sanction for this
purpose. Where goods are supplied, use of such a term is legally incapable
of producing that effect and may amount to an offence, because it serves
to restrict the consumer's statutory rights – see paragraph 2.1.1.

2.4.4 Any fault found in goods within six months of the date of sale is assumed to
be the supplier's responsibility unless he can prove otherwise. It is therefore
particularly misleading for contract terms to seek to exclude or limit the
consumer's right to redress for faulty goods during the first six months
after purchase. As noted above (page 11) the use of misleading terms may
give rise to enforcement action as an unfair commercial practice.

2.4.5 A statement that statutory rights are unaffected, without explanation, will
not make such a term acceptable to the OFT– see paragraph 1.5. A better approach is to insist on prompt notification in such a way as not to restrict
consumers' legal rights. One way to do this is to require notification of a
complaint within a 'reasonable' time of (or promptly after) discovery of a
problem.
2.4.6 There is similarly no objection to a term warning consumers of the need to
check to the best of their ability for any defects or discrepancies at the
earliest opportunity, and take prompt action as soon as they become aware
of any problem. Concerns do not arise so long as there is no suggestion
that the supplier disclaims liability for problems which consumers fail to
notice.

The law gives a reasonable time - and of course only a court can decide what a reasonable time is. So for them to put a 48 hour time limit on it would amount to a breach of unfair terms and may even amount to a criminal offence if it misleads consumers about their rights.

SuperHan

unholyangel wrote: »

The law gives a reasonable time - and of course only a court can decide what a reasonable time is. So for them to put a 48 hour time limit on it would amount to a breach of unfair terms and may even amount to a criminal offence if it misleads consumers about their rights.

48 hours is their interpretation of reasonable. They are entitled to interpret it how they please.

If you think that interpretation is wrong, or their are circumstances whereby they should extend this, it is for a court to decide what is reasonable.

Because your or the OP think 2 weeks is reasonable doesn't make you right or wrong. It's purposely open for interpretation. Only a court can rule what is reasonable in this specific scenario.

unholyangel

SuperHan wrote: »

48 hours is their interpretation of reasonable. They are entitled to interpret it how they please.

If you think that interpretation is wrong, or their are circumstances whereby they should extend this, it is for a court to decide what is reasonable.

Because your or the OP think 2 weeks is reasonable doesn't make you right or wrong. It's purposely open for interpretation. Only a court can rule what is reasonable in this specific scenario.

Or you could report them and they'd likely be made to delete/change such a term - since other companies have been made to delete/change similar terms - even those giving 7 days.

Original term
… the Customer shall … give Maples written notice of such loss or
damage with reasonable particulars thereof within 3 days of receipt of the
Goods.
Action taken
New term: … You must tell us about any fault or damage as soon as is
reasonably possible.
Original term
Faulty goods will be exchanged if returned or notified within 7 days from
the date of invoice and returned in original, clean and full packaging.
Action taken
Term deleted.
Original term
Written notice of any defect in the goods when delivered shall be served
upon the company within 7 days of delivery. The Customer shall be
deemed to have accepted the goods 7 days after delivery.
Action taken
New term: The Customer is asked to examine the goods as soon as
reasonably possible after delivery and notify the Company of any fault or
damage as soon as reasonably possible.
Original term
Hirer must inform Lessor within 48 hours, excluding public holidays, of
any loss of, or damage occurring to vehicle and of any fault reasonably
requiring repair, developing therein …
Action taken
New term: You must let us know as soon as you become aware of a fault
in the vehicle.

See a theme? They have no problem with retailers saying it must be done within a reasonable time. What they do have a problem with is that retailer defining what "reasonable" is.

However as of next year it will be a lot clearer, as they will be given 30 days minimum.

zoob

Most fridge freezer retailers would question a damaged fridge door only being reported after over 2 weeks, as far as there concerned the customer has being using it since they took delivery, they have no way of knowing when and where it got damaged, it could have got damaged buy the kitchen fitters? Who knows also as stated, it might have arrived damaged.

If you contacted the manafacturer they offer to replace the door.