UPDATE Good bye to the 1 yr old creaky sofa- The Chesterfield Company in Manchester.

Legacy_user

My PAXTON BLACK LEATHER CHESTERFIELD, Black Premium Aniline, 2 seater sofa, with chrome studs, is at its worst and time to be replaced. Beautiful looking sofa too, stunning! Hasn't worsened in looks but has to go because of the loudness of the dry loud creak/squeak/boingy noise from both seats ( oh my goodness you've never heard anything like it lol!) and the embarrassment caused to visitors sitting on it has been hilarious!

Maybe I'll keep the 3 seater for now although it is a bit useless and embarrassing, as only one seat can actually be used to sit on, due to the earlier mentioned fault ( when seated on the left seat you slide down to the middle of the sofa, virtually onto the person sat next to you, rubbing shoulders, bit like being on a a slide and sliding sideways) but it works for now, and it is also beautiful looking piece.

The leather on both sofas has been great, like a buttery smooth effect, which I would choose again, but obviously from a different company.

I'm off to look for a new one, should be easy to match and I will donate the other, or maybe that's an insult, I'll give it some thought first, but genuinely feel that some honest hard working person could fix it to their needs.

Good Luck to the sofa buyers and I genuinely hope that you have a better experience than I did. Thank you to everyone's for their advice in the matter.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5094233

.....................................................................................................
HISTORY-
Two hours after receiving my two sofas I reported an unseen fault in both sofas. Excessive movement in the frames when I lift onside to slide out, the opposite end stays heavy, solid and fixed to the ground, it sort of bends at the back corner where the arm is joined. The frame wobbles, yet my fifteen year old suite, which we have just got rid of due to a new colour scheme, never did this.

Difficulty with the company not answering emails. However they will send a technician tomorrow- 9 days later. Also they are saying that no refund would ever be given as they only repair, replace faulty goods as stated in their small print.

After taking advice from the forum I sent this email-
I would like to say that I explicitly reject the goods under the Sales of Goods Act (amended). Also that the retailers choice of repair, replace or refund only comes about once the goods are deemed to be accepted hence- I reject the goods under the Sales of Goods Act (amended). Therefore I am with in my rights to have a full refund.

Is the company right in replying today with the following?
...”We would disagree with that interpretation of the act and believe we are acting in accordance with the law by offering you a repair if a fault is found and we would stand by that assertion.

As soon as the technician submits his report we would be back in touch with the best way to proceed.

We stand by our interpretation of the law and that we are legally obligated to offer refund or repair in the case of fault.

I'd also say that the final sentence in that paragraph is important. In your case these are bespoke goods that have been made to order to your specification and our terms supplied on order clearly state that repair will be offered in the first instance.

"The period during which you can reject the goods is not clearly defined in law and can depend on the type of goods you have purchased and the facts of the case."

If we wait to see what the technician says and take it from there I think that would be the best course of action.
Kind Regards

Kind Regards ,K….
Sales Executive.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
I received an email yesterday 27.10.2014 form the company (sofa) following the technician report.

Most of it doesn’t make any sense as the company (sofa) has read the report wrong and confused the 3 seater with the 2 seater and vice versa. Why would they do this? I feel it is purposely done to misguide me…

ALSO Further fault ,three seater sofa- On the day of inspection Thurs 24.10.2014 the technician claimed that he only came to see the three seater sofa and had no paper work instructing him to view the two seater. I was very angry and made this very clear to the technician, he understood!. However, he took notes and pictures of the two seater as well. Moments into the inspection I (not the technician) recognised that the sofa had a further fault. This fault was only noticeable if meticulously inspecting and looking for faults when viewing it head on from the front/centre of the sofa. It took some time to figure out this further fault as I found it difficult to comprehend, I just couldn’t figure out! However, given a bit of time, stood head on/front facing I notice the fascia arms on the three seater sofa do not twin/match with each other. The right hand arm fascia noticeably turns under the arm bolster sooner and the studs around it taper upwards and away much sooner, compared to the left hand facing arm fascia. (It is supposed to have tear-drop arms that droop down slightly, a recognised style in the Chesterfied range! One does the other doesn’t) This is manufacture related and when viewed from the front the arm appears odd in comparison much like a seconds or damaged sofa would look, say from a cheap seconds company, which is fine if that’s what I wanted but I do not!


Further fault-Two seater sofa -

The two seater front wooden leg bows slightly inwards which is noticeable on very close, meticulous inspection. I am not a professional sofa producer or quality control trained inspector therefore I did not notice this further fault previously. However, I genuinely feel that this may cause future damage to the frame, unbalanced weight/pressure on the frame, etc, therefore the springs will rub and squeak in the future. I immediately brought this to the attention of the technician, the second that I noticed it. Again he took pictures and said that he would report it. I trust the professional technicians, response. He also mentioned that it would take about nine days in total, so stay calm and use the sofas (we haven’t as I am not sure about my rights on that yet) and wait for the companies (sofa) response.

Although the company said that I did not state the faults sooner, I feel it is acceptable that the faults were not noticed sooner, due to being unused and unseen for over nine days and me having a short break away through being distraught and not able to tolerate to look at the sofas. I reported the faults later for completeness and I knew the technician would provide photographic evidence (as he is the eyes and ears for the company, so to speak). Also due to the inconvenience of the technicians visit I had to cancel a short break away to my sisters, so I had to leave immediately for a short break as soon as the technician left.

Also, the faults were put in writing for completeness, but only yesterday the 27.10.14 after unpacking them. Does this matter as their terms don’t apply to me as I explicitly rejected the goods earlier than this, by email and also by a formal special delivery letter?

Secondly,

The email 27.10.2014 from the company is abrupt with an answer to everything. Mostly that I did not report the NEW FAULTS on delivery, or within hours of receiving them. Even though time and time again I explicitly told them that I wanted to reject the goods under the sales of goods act, the goods are unused and covered. They enforced a technician report against my wishes, therefore I told them they were entitled to inspect the goods to ensure they are indeed faulty and this isn't either (a) normal or (b) damage that I have caused, just to be on the safe side.

In addition, I stated that I am entitled to get a full refund including the cost of returning the items as they were faulty damaged goods and not fit for purpose. As a result their terms and conditions do not apply to me, as I explicitly said that I had rejected the goods earlier.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

TECHNITIAN REPORT 27.10.2014
HOME........ ID:
CLIENT: THE CHe…LD CO…./ F..EST SOFA LI..TED
DELIVERY DATE: 15/10/2014DM ORDER NUM:''''''''''
COMPLAINT: 32536
15/10/2014
CUSTOMER: P…. Fl…h..R
LEATHER
23/10/2014
BATCH LABEL PHOTO TAKEN: YES
TIME TAKEN: 20 mins
APPROVED: NO
DATE FILED: 23/10/2014 .
24/10/2014

NOTES: 2 seat sofa
FAULT CODE: UPHOLSTERY - MANUFACTURING FAULT SUB CODE:CREAKING FRAME
DESCRIPTION: ACTION TAKEN: ON INSPECTION 2 SEATER HAS A LOUD CREAK WHEN SAT ON.
I CAN CONFIRM THIS IS ON REAR SPRING RAIL AS THIS HAS FRICTION AND MOVEMENT.
CUSTOMER ALSO ADVISED SAW DUST KEEPS APPEARING UNDERNEATH FURNITURE.

CUSTOMER INSISTS ON A FULL REPLACEMENT AND ADVISED SHE IS WELL AWARE OF HER RIGHTS UNDER THE SALES OF GOODS ACT.
ADVISED CUSTOMER I WILL REPORT MY FINDINGS FULLY AND ONLY AGREED THAT YES I CAN HEAR A CREAK BUT MADE NO COMMENTS ON QUALITY OF FAULTS WITH FURNITURE.


Three seat sofa
FAULT CODE: UPHOLSTERY - MANUFACTURING FAULT SUB CODE:FIT OFF COVER
DESCRIPTION: ACTION TAKEN: 3 SEATER HAS RIGHT HAND FACING FRONT ARM FASCIA AS IT TURNS UNDER ARM THE BOLSTER WITH STUDS AROUND IT TAPERS AWAY MUCH SOONER COMPARED TO LEFT HAND FACING ARM.
PLEASE REFER TO PICS AS THIS IS CLEARER TO SEE.
THIS IS MANUFACTURING RELATED AS WHEN VIEWED FROM THE FRONT OF 3 SEATER THESE ARMS APPEARS ODD.

AGAIN CUSTOMER INSISTS ON REJECTING FURNITURE. THIS IS BEYOND REPAIR AS IF ARM UNPICKED YOU WILL BE LEFT WITH STAPLE HOLES AND STUD MARKS.
FAULT CODE: UPHOLSTERY - MANUFACTURING FAULT SUB CODE: INCORRECTLY ASSEMBLED


Two seat sofa
Fault Code Manufacturing Fault
DESCRIPTION: ACTION TAKEN: 2 SEATER HAS FRONT LEFT HAND FACING LEG LEANING INWARDS.
THIS IS EITHER THE T NUT IS NOT INSERTED STRAIGHT OR CASTOR BLOCK IS NOT STRAIGHT.

CUSTOMER IS ADAMANT ON A FULL REPLACEMENT AND WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY REPAIRS.
IF REPAIRED WILL NEED TO STRAIGHTEN T NUT OR CASTOR BLOCK. FAULT CODE: INVALID CLAIM SUB CODE:NO FAULTS FOUND


DESCRIPTION: ACTION TAKEN: CUSTOMER MAIN ISSUE IS THAT WHEN THE FURNITURE IS LIFTED BY ONE ARM IE TO PULL THE LEFT HAND FACING ARM UPWARDS, CUSTOMER FEELS THE FLEX IN BOTH FRONT AND REAR SPRING RAIL IS DEFECTIVE AND THAT FRAME TWISTS.
IN MY OPINION THIS IS NOT A FAULT AND FURNITURE IS NOT MADE TO BE LIFTED BY ONE ARM ONLY OR AT ALL.

AS AN EXAMPLE IF THIS WAS REPLACED I CAN GUARANTEE THE REPLACEMENT ITEM WILL BE EXACTLY THE SAME.
ADVISED CUSTOMER I WILL REPORT MY FINDINGS FULLY. I DID NOT COMMENT ON DEFECTS OR THAT THIS IS NOT DEFECTIVE AS CUSTOMER WAS VERY PERSISTENT THAT THIS IS FAULTY FURNITURE AND IS ADAMANT THAT FURNITURE WILL BE RETURNED.

FURTHER VISIT REQUIRED (Y/N)? NO
ESTIMATED REPAIR/COST TIME: COST OF JOB £25
NO COLOUR MATCH SAMPLE TAKEN:
CUSTOMER SATISFIED: NO
PARTS USED QUANTITY
Date Added: 23/10/2014 FULL ITEM PICTURE
Date Added: 23/10/2014 CUSTOMER SIGNATURE
Date Added: 23/10/2014 FAULT
Date Added: 23/10/2014 3 str left hand facing arm finished correct shape.
557853 20/10/2014 FS/ZFI001
Date Added: 23/10/2014 FULL ITEM PICTURE
Date Added: 23/10/2014 FAULT
Date Added: 23/10/2014 FAULT
Date Added: 23/10/2014


COMPANY REPLY- (Part 1 (Of part 1) Yesterday’s Email 27.10.2014 From Chesterfield Sofa Company Salford)

" Please see attached for the technicians report.
As you can see he has fully passed on your comments regarding the shape of the arm etc but does not agree that these represent fault. The main reason the technician was sent, wobbly frame when lifting, has been rejected. He has advised he can hear a noise when the sofa is in use however this is easily rectifiable as this is just the metal spring touching the wooden framework.

With regard to dust being visible, this wasn't logged on delivery or in any of the emails and therefore we cannot say this has happened in the factory or accept this as fault. Equally the leg has never been mentioned to us and could have been knocked at any point following delivery and also will not be accepted as fault.

With regard to the arm, again this is not something you have mentioned to us on delivery. This is a handmade product with each stud placed individually. Some variances are to be expected and are part of the handmade nature of the product.

Kind Regards

K...........
Sales Executive "

.................................................. .......................................





.................................................. ......................................


MY REPLY TO THE COMPANY Executive K, 27.10.014
Bold Black text me/ customer response to company (sofa) claims,

May I politely bring to your attention that you have misread the report ,the report has been misunderstood?

• The main reason the technician was sent, wobbly frame when lifting, has been rejected.Customer replies - This mentioned fault is for the three seater sofa. The same one with the faulty facia arms not matching, where the studs are odd and the teardrop arms do not twin/match. Not the two seater sofa with the faulty squeaky spring.

• He has advised he can hear a noise when the sofa is in use however this is easily rectifiable as this is just the metal spring touching the wooden framework. Customer replies -This is on the two seater sofa. However, you incline that the report claims that the faults are related to just the one sofa, even though the report clearly states that this it is not the case.

Please stop trying to misguide me from the faults with the sofa and stop trying to direct me from my legal rights, surely as a professional trader you know that it is illegal to do so.

• Equally the leg has never been mentioned to us and could have been knocked at any point following delivery and also will not be accepted as fault.

Customer replies- No one has knocked the two seater sofa leg at any time and it is up to you to prove differently. As stated in your report it is manufacturing fault due to Tnut etc. Also the two seater leg is a front wooden one that bows inwards which is only noticeable on very close, meticulous inspection. I am not a professional sofa producer or quality control trained therefore I did not notice this previously. However , I genuinely feel that this may cause future damage to the frame, as it may cause it to become unbalanced therefore cause the springs to rub against the unbalanced frame and cause more fault, if it has not already done so to date.

• With regard to the arm, again this is not something you have mentioned to us on delivery. This is a handmade product with each stud placed individually. Some variances are to be expected and are part of the handmade nature of the product.
Customer replies- I am not Quality Control Trained and only noticed the fault after meticulously inspecting the sofa during the technicians visit. I found it difficult to comprehend even after five minutes of staring at the THREE SEATER SOFA. As a result, it was difficult to put into words or to explain.I pointed the fault out to my husband later the same evening, however he struggled to see the fault- he is not Quality Control Trained either. However, as stated in your report due to manufacturing fault they do not twin with each other, are odd and can not be repaired due to pin holes etc. I mentioned this to the technician immediately, the second I noticed it.

Also, keeping in mind that both sofas are in an unused condition and still placed in an unused room, due to the stress caused by your company as stated in earlier emails to (K.. and L...). Therefore, it is acceptable that the faults were not noticed sooner, due to being unused and unseen for over a week.


Further faults in more detail,I noticed by myself on closer meticulous inspection during the technician’s visit 23.10.14, therefore it was I who pointed the faults out to the technician who instantly assured me that he would report my further concerns to The Che.... Company ta For... Sofas Ltd with photographic evidence. Then returned to completing his report on the unused faulty and not fit for purpose Vintage Leather Pax... Chesterfield sofas 23.10.2014.

• The teardrop arm on the 3 seater sofa - the right hand facing front arm fascia noticeably turns under the arm bolster while all of the studs around it taper away much sooner compared to the left hand facing front arm. (This well recognised tear-drop style is supposed to droop slightly into a tear-drop shape- one arm does the other doesn't) This is manufacturing related as when viewed from the front centre of three seat sofa the arms appear odd in comparison, much like a seconds/damaged sofa would look say from a Cheap Seconds Company. This is beyond repair as if the arm is unpicked it would definitely leave with stud holes and markings in the leather.

You were entitled to view the goods however I am explicitly rejecting the goods under The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended).

Following your final decision, I will wait silently and will be in touch again after fourteen days’ time after receiving responses from Visa Company and Trading Standards.

Thank you
(customer- ME!)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

So no luck with that. Next steps
I tried to claim on my VISA DEBIT card. But no luck there either…

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 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. (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:… (As above) Technician Visit…. Technician result…
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,
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Hi All,

Unsuccessful with the Visa Debit Chargeback and Disputes.

Thank you all for your help and advice however in my opinion the Law regarding rejecting faulty goods is just a complete waste of time. The law is clear, reads well, is full of comfort and hope but that is about it. Worthless!

Visa Debit Chargeback and Disputes department just stated the obvious which is disheartening after a three week long wait. In my opinion they are worthless too regarding faulty rejected goods (within hours of delivery). Can’t comment on how they would be if the goods became faulty a few years later, etc, as I've never needed to use this route.

Today I received a letter from The Royal Bank of Scotland Chargebacks and Disputes -

“This department has no direct contact with individual retailers. In some instances, an investigation may be undertaken through Visa, but we are subject to their strict rules of enquiry and time constraints.

Whilst I sympathise with your predicament, the only line of enquiry available through Visa when goods are delivered faulty, is when the retailer are unwilling to resolve the matter. In this case the retailer appears to be willing to repair or replace the sofas, therefore the Bank is unable to arbitrate or sit in judgement.


Should the retailer refuse to repair or replace the faulty sofas, to enable further assistance we will require the goods to be returned to the retailer and proof of returns supplied.


I can only suggest you persue the retailer direct in an attempt to reach a satisfactory conclusion. You may also wish to seek independent legal advice from Trading Standards Office or Citizens Advice Bureau. “

CONCLUSION- I won't be taking the offer of repair from the company as I know it will be one long stressful journey of call out, wait in, call out wait in .... Sorry to be so negative over something that's only materialistic but that’s how I feel, so I'll lick my wounds for now.

Thank you again and good luck to all sofa buyers especially as it is the season to be buying sofas.

Original link
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5094233