Issue with an online shop

Jetart1407

I recently bought an expensive used camera from a very reputable online shop, I traded in some of my old equipment as a part exchange. I had the option to receive cash for the part ex or just put it straight towards the camera so I chose to put it towards the camera.

It developed a fault within a few months so I sent it in for repair under their warranty and was told to expect 2-3 weeks turnaround. 2 weeks after posting it I phone them for an update and they tell me it was received and had been sent to the repair shop and they have no updates as yet. I contacted the repair shop directly and they tell me they have no record of ever having received it.

The camera shop then confirm to me it seems to have been lost and that parcel force have it. I give them a week to resolve the problem, they told me they will send a replacement if it cant be found.
After that week they then tell me they havent found it so I can have a refund instead as they now have no replacement however they can only refund me what I paid cash, the money earned from the part ex can only be used in credit with their store. (this is several hundred pounds)

It also happens that the only option if I want the same model is to buy a new one which is an extra £300. As they arent cheapest for this model but due to them holding nearly half of my money I now feel I am being forced to buy with them as I cant afford to go elsewhere and leave that money with them.

I was wanting to know my rights in this, are they entitled to do this or is what they doing bordering on illegal?

They also told me it may still turn up so I could wait but I frankly I do not want that camera now as I do not know what condition it may now be in, who may have used it or how it may have been stored. It has now been unaccounted for for nearly 3 weeks. Am I within my rights to refuse it?

Ive left out their name as I still want to give them the opportunity to rectify it but I just need to know where I stand in terms of my rights

neilmcl

If they can't give you a suitable replacement then you are entitled to a full refund for the camera. As they have accepted your old equipment in part exchange which formed part of the contract then you are entitled to the cash equivalent of this also. They cannot force you you accept credit.

There's no reason why you shouldn't name the company in question, in fact it may even help.

Jetart1407

Thanks, im going to give them chance to rectify it first but they are one of the bigger names in camera equipment so im pretty shocked they even suggested forcing me to take credit.
I told them I would call back on Monday morning to speak to someone higher as I wasn't convinced they could do this

unholyangel

If they try to tell you they can do this, point them to the Consumer Rights Act:

(9)The consumer’s entitlement to receive a refund works as follows.
(10)To the extent that the consumer paid money under the contract, the consumer is entitled to receive back the same amount of money.

(11)To the extent that the consumer transferred anything else under the contract, the consumer is entitled to receive back the same amount of what the consumer transferred, unless subsection (12) applies.

(12)To the extent that the consumer transferred under the contract something for which the same amount of the same thing cannot be substituted, the consumer is entitled to receive back in its original state whatever the consumer transferred.

snip

(15)A refund under this section must be given without undue delay, and in any event within 14 days beginning with the day on which the trader agrees that the consumer is entitled to a refund.

(16)If the consumer paid money under the contract, the trader must give the refund using the same means of payment as the consumer used, unless the consumer expressly agrees otherwise.

(17)The trader must not impose any fee on the consumer in respect of the refund.

(18)There is no entitlement to receive a refund—
(a)if none of subsections (10) to (12) applies,
(b)to the extent that anything to which subsection (12) applies cannot be given back in its original state, or
(c)where subsection (13) applies, to the extent that anything the consumer transferred under the contract cannot be divided so as to give back only the amount, or part of the amount, to which the consumer is entitled.

(19)It may be open to a consumer to claim damages where there is no entitlement to receive a refund, or because of the limits of the entitlement, or instead of a refund.

And the accompanying explanatory notes provide:

113.Subsection (10) provides that where a refund is to be provided and the original payment (or part of it) was made with money, the consumer is entitled to money back for the money they paid, so the trader may not substitute store vouchers, credit or an equivalent in place of the required monetary refund.

114.If money was not used to pay for the goods, under subsections (11) and (12), the consumer is not entitled to money back but the “refund” would be a return of whatever the consumer gave in exchange for the goods (see examples below). If this cannot be returned to the consumer due to the nature of the exchange, then, under subsection (18) and (19), the consumer may not demand a refund but may pursue a damages claim. The consumer still has a “right to reject” (that is, to reject the goods and treat the contract as at an end) in this situation, but the means of obtaining money back is different. Examples of situations where these subsections may apply include:

-A toy “bought” with vouchers collected from cereal packets. In this case it would be possible to return equivalent vouchers (even though they would not necessarily be the actual vouchers that the consumer cut out) and a “refund” could therefore take that form under subsection (11).

-A microwave supplied to the consumer by a trader specialising in refurbishment of white-goods, in exchange for the consumer’s old fridge-freezer. In this case, if the fridge-freezer was still available in an unchanged state, then this could be returned to the consumer as a “refund” under subsection (12), but if it was no longer available, or had been refurbished, then a refund would not be possible.

115.Where money formed part of what the consumer used to pay for the goods but the rest was “paid for” with something else (something non-monetary), the consumer is still entitled to a refund for the money that they paid and return of the other property transferred if possible. The consumer may pursue a damages claim for any loss for which they cannot claim a “refund” (of money or property) under section 20.

Jetart1407

Thanks for the reply both of you, very helpful!

So what do you think about my second question of having the right to refuse the return of my camera if Parcel force find it or at least demand it goes through a full service?
I appreciate its probably more of a grey area and I will probably lose any bargaining rights to discount on a new one but my concern is its been stored poorly (somewhere damp), used by someone, kicked around a warehouse for a few weeks or been bouncing around in a van for a while. As they wont be able to guarantee me its been in a safe place and untouched then I will have no confidence in it really

unholyangel

Jetart1407 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply both of you, very helpful!

So what do you think about my second question of having the right to refuse the return of my camera if Parcel force find it or at least demand it goes through a full service?
I appreciate its probably more of a grey area and I will probably lose any bargaining rights to discount on a new one but my concern is its been stored poorly (somewhere damp), used by someone, kicked around a warehouse for a few weeks or been bouncing around in a van for a while. As they wont be able to guarantee me its been in a safe place and untouched then I will have no confidence in it really

Its a tricky question, not a straightforward one but from the way you phrased it, it sounded like they offered it as an option if you wanted to wait.

I'll try and put it as succinctly as I can (often impossible where the laws concerned!). As the fault occurred outwith the initial 30 days after purchase, they're entitled to 1 attempt to repair or replace - which needs to be carried out within a reasonable time and without causing significant inconvenience. If they are unable to do this or the repair/replacement fails to correct the issue, then you would be entitled to insist on a refund again (and within first 6 months after purchase, refund needs to be full).


However, I would suggest if the camera has been missing for 3 weeks and a repair takes 2-3 weeks that even if the camera did turn up, they would have breached the "within a reasonable time" requirement for the repair and you would have the right to reject for a refund.

Also, if there was any damage to the camera then they would be liable for that damage (providing they paid the courier, if you paid & arranged the courier yourself then the courier would be liable).