We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Faulty smartphone
EugeneB
Posts: 51 Forumite
On 28 September 2015 I bought a smartphone through an online retailer (eglobalcentral.co.uk) with my Credit Card which I found to be faulty - during normal use it just suddenly restarts. (Frankly I've seen this happen during the very first days of using it but ignored, now it happens somewhat more often.)
On 2 December I tried contacting the retailer but got no reply.
On 22 December I sent my Section 75 complaint to my credit card company.
I got the reply from my bank today and they are asking for an independent report - but I thought that if the purchase been made withing 6 month then the retailer (therefore jointly and severally bank too) have to prove it was not faulty, not me otherwise.
Do I need to provide my bank with the report?
On 2 December I tried contacting the retailer but got no reply.
On 22 December I sent my Section 75 complaint to my credit card company.
I got the reply from my bank today and they are asking for an independent report - but I thought that if the purchase been made withing 6 month then the retailer (therefore jointly and severally bank too) have to prove it was not faulty, not me otherwise.
Do I need to provide my bank with the report?
0
Comments
-
Have you pointed out to your card issuer that during the first six months following the sale any fault can be assumed to have been present at the time of sale and it is for the seller to prove otherwise, and therefore that onus automatically applies to the credit provider?On 2 October 2015 I bought a smartphone through an online retailer (eglobalcentral.co.uk) with my Credit Card which I found to be faulty - during normal use it just suddenly restarts. (Frankly I've seen this happen during the very first days of using it but ignored, now it happens somewhat more often.)
On 2 December I tried contacting the retailer but got no reply.
On 22 December I sent my Section 75 complaint to my credit card company.
I got the reply from my bank today and they are asking for an independent report - but I thought that if the purchase been made withing 6 month then the retailer (therefore jointly and severally bank too) have to prove it was not faulty, not me otherwise.
Do I need to provide my bank with the report?0 -
Have you pointed out to your card issuer that during the first six months following the sale any fault can be assumed to have been present at the time of sale and it is for the seller to prove otherwise, and therefore that onus automatically applies to the credit provider?
No, I haven't mentioned that in my original letter to the card issuer.
I guess I'll send him a reply along those lines, thanks.
I wonder if there a template letter for that?0 -
Dear Sirs,I wonder if there a template letter for that?
I do not believe that you should be asking me to provide an independent report showing that [the problem] is due to an inherent fault for the following reasons.
Paragraph (15) of Section 19 of The Consumer Rights Act effectively states that if a fault appears during the first six months following a sale, then the fault is assumed to have been present at the time of sale. From this we can conclude that it is for the seller to prove otherwise.
The first paragraph of Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act states that the credit supplier is " jointly and severally liable to the debtor".
From this it can be seen that either the credit supplier or the seller are the ones to prove that the problem is not due to an inherent fault.
Please let me know when you want me to return the phone to you.
Yours etc.0 -
I got the reply from my bank today and they are asking for an independent report - but I thought that if the purchase been made withing 6 month then the retailer (therefore jointly and severally bank too) have to prove it was not faulty, not me otherwise.Have you pointed out to your card issuer that during the first six months following the sale any fault can be assumed to have been present at the time of sale and it is for the seller to prove otherwise, and therefore that onus automatically applies to the credit provider?
I know that within 6 months from purchase the onus is on the retailer (and in this case, the credit company) to disprove that the fault is inherent due to a manufacturing defect, but surely they are still entitled to ask for proof that a fault actually exists.
If I was to take anything back to a shop within 4 weeks from purchase because it is faulty, the shop has the right to confirm the fault exists and this might be what the credit card company want a report for as the OP makes no mention of the letter they received asking for proof of an inherent fault.0 -
Thanks!Dear Sirs,
I do not believe that you should be asking me to provide an independent report showing that [the problem] is due to an inherent fault for the following reasons.
Paragraph (15) of Section 19 of The Consumer Rights Act effectively states that if a fault appears during the first six months following a sale, then the fault is assumed to have been present at the time of sale. From this we can conclude that it is for the seller to prove otherwise.
The first paragraph of Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act states that the credit supplier is " jointly and severally liable to the debtor".
From this it can be seen that either the credit supplier or the seller are the ones to prove that the problem is not due to an inherent fault.
Please let me know when you want me to return the phone to you.
Yours etc.
Small correction - I double checked and realized that the purchase was made on 28 September 2015, not 2 October 2015.
So I had to change "Paragraph (15) of Section 19 of The Consumer Rights Act" to "Paragraph (3) of Section 48A of The Sale of Goods Act 1979".0 -
Yes, I can understand your point, but for the CC co to ask for an independent report is a bit much - in my opinion.George_Michael wrote: »I know that within 6 months from purchase the onus is on the retailer (and in this case, the credit company) to disprove that the fault is inherent due to a manufacturing defect, but surely they are still entitled to ask for proof that a fault actually exists.
If I was to take anything back to a shop within 4 weeks from purchase because it is faulty, the shop has the right to confirm the fault exists and this might be what the credit card company want a report for as the OP makes no mention of the letter they received asking for proof of an inherent fault.
It should be acceptable for the consumer to describe the problem, in such detail that it can be confirmed by others, and for the consumer to send the thing to the CC co so the CC co can see the problem for themselves - again, just my opinion.
0 -
George_Michael wrote: »I know that within 6 months from purchase the onus is on the retailer (and in this case, the credit company) to disprove that the fault is inherent due to a manufacturing defect, but surely they are still entitled to ask for proof that a fault actually exists.
If I was to take anything back to a shop within 4 weeks from purchase because it is faulty, the shop has the right to confirm the fault exists and this might be what the credit card company want a report for as the OP makes no mention of the letter they received asking for proof of an inherent fault.
They specifically asked for:An independent report from a reputable source to support your claims that the phone is faulty due to a manufacturers fault.0 -
Many moons ago I had to claim on my debit card for what had turned out to be a "second" of a collectable piece of china, instead of a "first" quality, for which I had paid the going rate.
My bank required a report, and I simply looked for a dealer in this type of china, who charged a small fee for a written report. This fee was recoverable from the seller and the bank reimbursed me for this.
Perhaps you could find an independent phone repairer who would be prepared to provide a report on their headed business paper?0 -
It should be acceptable for the consumer to describe the problem, in such detail that it can be confirmed by others, and for the consumer to send the thing to the CC co so the CC co can see the problem for themselves - again, just my opinion.
But if it's an intermittent fault, it might well be working as it should when the credit card company receive it and there is no way that they would spend more than a few seconds looking at it (and this is providing that they even have someone employed who would be able to do this.).
That's why I think a report from a 3rd party simply stating that they have checked the phone and found that it is faulty might well speed up the time it take for the problem to be resolved.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.1K Spending & Discounts
- 246.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.1K Life & Family
- 260.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards