Arbitration is all very well, but what if......

KeithP

miserable_ol_so_n_so wrote: »

...I was not going to spend the rest of my life tightening the hinge!

But you are prepared to spend the rest of your life arguing about it.
How strange.

miserable_ol_so_n_so wrote: »

I now have to pursue a thermostatic shower that came with a 10 year warranty but has developed a fault 9 years and 6 months since its installation! The manufacturer has agreed to fully honour the guarantee.....but he says he will charge for labour to travel and renew the faulty part! He cant say how much it will cost! Is this ripoff Britain?

You are probably best starting a new thread about this.
I look forward to it.

I will just say that a manufacturer's warranty is in addition to your statutory rights and as such can have conditions attached. One of those conditions might be "the customer covers labour costs".
Read you warranty documentation to confirm the conditions attached to your warranty, but as it is a ten year warranty, I strongly suspect it to be a 'parts only' warranty.

powerful_Rogue

What a palava over £25.

The time its going to take, as well as the time you have spent on it - plus the 50 sheets of 'evidence' you are going to print out, is it really worth it?

I'm all for standing up for my rights, however an hour at work for me would pay for a replacement items. It would take many many more hours to take this to court and still with a good chance of losing.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

Thank you.

waamo wrote: »

As it is a small component that has failed (£6) then that is what a court would expect to be claimed.

If the merchant had agreed to reimburse the £6, I would have ordered the bit from eBay. It would have arrived the next day and the seat would have been made safe. But the merchant rejected this cost effective solution. I ordered a new seat from elsewhere, it arrived the next day and was installed in 10 minutes.
I was not prepared to effect any repairs without the merchants approval as I would then be held responsible if anything were to go wrong in future.

waamo wrote: »

By providing you the component your actual loss at this point drops to £0.

The component that has been provided arrived 2 weeks later. It is not the robust metal one but the same flimsy plastic one. It is of no use to me as the seat has been replaced. Even if it had been the metal one it would be useless now. What was needed was swift action.
Ironically, the plastic hinge sells for £7! This plastic replacement hinge is on sale by many many sellers on eBay and Amazon etc. There must be a huge demand. I do not think it is a collectors item. I believe the demand is there because it fails!

My loss is not £0 or £24.99. I paid £85 for the new seat. I am not claiming any extra.

waamo wrote: »

I think a judge would be interested to know why you are using a court over a pretty trivial matter. You have had the part and you are able to fix it.

In my opinion this is not trivial. The seat was unsafe to use and I was not prepared to risk the safety of anyone. I took the appropriate action and replaced the seat with another one costing considerably more than £24.99. I am not claiming the extra I had to pay. I have not tampered with the original seat which is available for anyone to inspect. Had I ordered and fitted the part, I would have lost all rights and would be held responsible for anything that could go wrong in future. As stated previously, the replacement sent did not arrive for 2 weeks and is useless now as the seat was replaced 2 weeks ago.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

KeithP wrote: »

But you are prepared to spend the rest of your life arguing about it.
How strange.



You are probably best starting a new thread about this.
I look forward to it.

I will just say that a manufacturer's warranty is in addition to your statutory rights and as such can have conditions attached. One of those conditions might be "the customer covers labour costs".
Read you warranty documentation to confirm the conditions attached to your warranty, but as it is a ten year warranty, I strongly suspect it to be a 'parts only' warranty.

Thanks, I will start a new thread regarding this item. Yes I believe it was a parts only.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

waamo wrote: »

As I said earlier court should be a last resort. Not only that but in law you have a duty to keep any loss you suffer to a minimum.

I believe I have exhausted all avenues. I have gone past the time limit for chargeback. I was unable to raise the Amazon A to Z procedure as it has gone past their 90 day time limit. I will however contact them to see if they will make an exception.

As regarding duty to keep costs down, the metal hinge that the manufacturer supplies, costs between £11 and £16! I took the time and trouble to look to see if it was cheaper elsewhere.I did find it but my proposal was rejected out of hand. Not only that, I was blamed for the failure. I had no option but to reject such a suggestion. I believe I have done as much as I can to reslove this speedily and economically.

The things that are putting costs up now are the requirements of the justice system.

One point about the LBC. The template I downloaded from Which? requires me to send the documents I will be relying upon. In this instance, that is what will put the costs up straight away even if no action takes place. The documents are essential.

DoaM

You don't need to include the actual documents with your LBC. You just need to refer to documentation that you'll refer to in any subsequent claim.

The LBC simply needs to state:

What is the issue
What resolution you're seeking
When that resolution needs to happen by
What your next steps will be if no resolution is agreed (and reference to the evidence you'll use in any claim).

waamo

miserable_ol_so_n_so wrote: »

Arbitrators would charge me over £100 simply to provide names of 3 of it's members! My claim is for only £24.99!

How has the claim suddenly jumped from £24.99 to £85?

If you have paid £24.99 for the original seat you cannot claim £85 for a new one.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

waamo wrote: »

How has the claim suddenly jumped from £24.99 to £85?

If you have paid £24.99 for the original seat you cannot claim £85 for a new one.

It has not jumped to £85. I replaced the seat with a more expensive one. I have not said I am claiming £85. I will reread my post in case it has given that impression. Pls bear with me.

Heres what I wrote "My loss is not £0 or £24.99. I paid £85 for the new seat. I am not claiming any extra."

"In my opinion this is not trivial. The seat was unsafe to use and I was not prepared to risk the safety of anyone. I took the appropriate action and replaced the seat with another one costing considerably more than £24.99. I am not claiming the extra I had to pay."

Just to be clear, all I am claiming for is the £24.99, what I paid the merchant. No more, no less.
Sorry if my posts have given any other impression.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

DoaM wrote: »

You don't need to include the actual documents with your LBC. You just need to refer to documentation that you'll refer to in any subsequent claim.

The LBC simply needs to state:

What is the issue
What resolution you're seeking
When that resolution needs to happen by
What your next steps will be if no resolution is agreed (and reference to the evidence you'll use in any claim).

Thanks I will reread the downloaded template.

I just did and you are right. All I need to do is mention the documents I will be relying upon. In this case, all the email correspondence conducted at the Amazon site.
This being the case, I will send this off soon and I will also contact Amazon.

miserable_ol_so_n_so

waamo wrote: »

... If he chooses not to defend you stand a chance. Often companies neglect these things. Enforcing it might be another matter.

I am intrigued by this answer. Surely if I did obtain judgement, even if by default, then my understanding is that I can engage a bailiff to collect not just the award but the Bailiffs costs as well. The bailiff would have the right to collect the payment or to remove items from the defender to be sold.