Manufacturing fault - can I still get a refund?

unholyangel

naedanger wrote: »

I don't think the retailer has actually said the reason they are denying the claim is because they believe the item was sufficiently durable given the price. In addition the op has apparently been told by the manufacturer the cause was a manufacturing fault rather than overuse or misuse.

Personally I would have thought a bag costing £30 should last many years unless it was designed for looks rather than durability.

That said, I agree the point is arguable and the amounts involved are such that it is unlikely to be worth risking court action.

The manufacturing fault is a moot point though if the bags are deemed to have lasted a reasonable length of time.

First question would be if it had lasted a reasonable length of time. If the answer to that was no, then they'd look at why it hasn't lasted a reasonable time. But if the answer to that is yes, thats the end of the line.

Sunny_Saver

No, the first bag lasted nine months. It was not used thereafter.
The second bag has only lasted four month and now not used. So neither has lasted two years in terms of usage time if that makes sense.

Also these £30 bags were only sold at £30 at TKM, it is highly likely that they were sold at a higher price at NW.

According to Nine West, if I had purchased it from them directly, they would be under a five-year warranty.

I take on board everyone's point about it being more hassle than it's worth and I would probably tell someone else the same. But I guess when it's my money wasted I feel aggrieved.

I know my contract for sale was with TK Maxx, but part of me feels that Nine West, having admitted being at fault should have offered some sort of goodwill, so I wouldn't have to go through any palaver.

For example, when Kettle Chips did the recall it told consumers to send back the crisps directly to them, not return to the retailer.

I looked up a few of the references, you guys pointed me to. In my instance the SOGA is the relevant legislation. If the handbag was faulty within six months of purchase, it is up to the retailers to prove that it wasn't faulty at the time of purchase. If the handbag became faulty after nine months then it is for the customer to prove the goods as being faulty at time of purchase.

Anyway, next stop, CEO!

naedanger

Sunny_Saver wrote: »

But I guess when it's my money wasted I feel aggrieved.

In a similar situation (i.e. where I felt/knew I was in the right, but the amount involved was not enough to justify the work/risk of taking legal action) I too would feel aggrieved. If I felt very strongly then I would not use the same company in future.

Anyway, next stop, CEO!

I hope this works for you.