New consumer Law and fit for purpose being ignored

Chutzpah71

Hi,


I bought an electrical item from Argos 10 months ago, it never worked as described ( its a laser hair remover) but the nature of it is that you have to persevere through several months of use before you can be sure its not working.


I don't think it has a fault, I think its not fit for purpose in that what it was advertised to do - it doesn't do. Argos have been very difficult about it - they are refusing to deal with the issue direct sending me to the manufacturer - when I refused to go to them as I was contacting the seller first - they claimed I would have to pay for an independent report first - despite the fact that its them im supposed to go to first not the manufacturer?!


They have said they will ONLY assist in some way if there is a fault ( either discovered by private report of the manufacturer) and only then will they consider a replacement.


But Consumer Law covers fit for purpose doesn't it? they seem to be saying no fault no help, despite the device not doing what it was claimed it would do?


Don't I have any redress here? the previous Law covered more than obvious faults in the first 6 months.


Thanks

KeithP

Have you read MSE's Consumer Rights Guide?

In there you will see that after six months from the sale you need to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the product did not conform to contract at the time of the sale.

One way, and maybe the most common way, of doing that is to get an independent report that says that.

neilmcl

If it's not fit for purpose then it is up to you to prove this to them, simple as that I'm afraid. Can you tell us which product this is?

LilElvis

neilmcl wrote: »

If it's not fit for purpose then it is up to you to prove this to them, simple as that I'm afraid. Can you tell us which product this is?

The added complication is that results with laser treatments are also affected by the hair colour and skin tone of the individual.

Chutzpah71

Thanks for all the replies.


My argument is that I have the 'perfect' combination of skin tone and hair colour that its claimed will give the best results. Also there are reports online of people dealing with the same issue as me - some initial hair reduction in small 'patches' then an increase as treatments continue of the hair in those patches returning.


Fit for purpose is very vague legal language, as the Law is new im presuming there are no actual test cases that finesse this wording? - but the advert for this product is clear - permanent hair removal of the majority of hair in the treatment area ( its the Braun silk expert IPL)


Thanks all..

hollydays

Did you not look at reviews?

LilElvis

Chutzpah71 wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies.


My argument is that I have the 'perfect' combination of skin tone and hair colour that its claimed will give the best results. Also there are reports online of people dealing with the same issue as me - some initial hair reduction in small 'patches' then an increase as treatments continue of the hair in those patches returning.


Fit for purpose is very vague legal language, as the Law is new im presuming there are no actual test cases that finesse this wording? - but the advert for this product is clear - permanent hair removal of the majority of hair in the treatment area ( its the Braun silk expert IPL)


Thanks all..

Nothing in the description on the Argos site says that you will achieve total cessation of hair growth after x times of use. This is a home use product and therefore not of the same strength and efficacy as those used, by trained professionals, in salons and which cost thousands. Twelve years ago I spent more than the cost of your machine on a course of 6 sessions to treat my bikini line alone, taking over 6 months. Sorry, but you got what you paid for - it does what it said it would, the fact that you hoped it would do more than the description states does not make it "not fit for purpose".

esuhl

What does the product claim to do, and what does it actually do?

If the claims are weak, you might not have strong rights.

If products were always "fit for purpose", homeopathy tablets would be illegal.

Chutzpah71

No LilElvis I did not get what I paid for - a couple of patches 1 inch across with no hair for a few weeks in not what was claimed - I ask for advice and your reponse is to go trawling at Argos to try and catch me out?


Actually I did my homework - I went to several places online and actually Argos had the Braun product detailing on there when I bought it which can still be found at the Braun website.


The Braun product detailing DOES go into treatments and what it supposedly does - that is what my decision was based on, Argos doesn't even currently talk about hair removal in the description, so I have no idea where you can think its ok to start saying I 'got what I paid for'


Please don't respond further - im not here for someone trying to discredit my position im here for information about Consumer Law. There is a massive difference between what was claimed and what it actually did and your 3 second scan of the argos product description as if to claim otherwise is really classless.

BoGoF

So you only want replies that agree with your point of view - good luck with that.

stuartJo1989

Chutzpah71 wrote: »

No LilElvis I did not get what I paid for - a couple of patches 1 inch across with no hair for a few weeks in not what was claimed - I ask for advice and your reponse is to go trawling at Argos to try and catch me out?

I like how you said "try and catch me out" - LilElvis is just looking at your case in a fair manner and by using all of the information present. They weren't setting out to "try and catch you out", but rather to better inform you with your predicament. Using the words "try and catch me out" sounds like you are being evasive and hiding something, getting a bit defensive when someone challenges it....

If you go to Small Claims Court then this is going to be one of the biggest talking points and an unbiased third party (ie a judge or case handler) is going to use that very same Argos product description to determine whether you are correct or not.

Actually I did my homework - I went to several places online and actually Argos had the Braun product detailing on there when I bought it which can still be found at the Braun website.

Ok cool, so let's see the product description and we can give you a fair and honest assessment.

Please don't respond further - im not here for someone trying to discredit my position im here for information about Consumer Law. There is a massive difference between what was claimed and what it actually did and your 3 second scan of the argos product description as if to claim otherwise is really classless.

Righto... In that case I would recommend that you:

1. Gather all of your evidence that the product is "not fit for purpose" (just like to point out that it is more likely to be classed as "not as described" - its purpose is to remove hair via laser and it sound like it does that absolutely fine; the only crux being that it doesn't remove as much, or as effectively, as advertised)

2. Provide this to Argos and ask nicely for a resolution.

3. If they decline in 2. then take them to Small Claims Court armed with your evidence.

4. (Optional) Go and pay a lawyer to go through your consumer rights with you, particularly if you do not value the FREE advice given by established board members on a FREE consumer rights forum.

That's pretty much all you need to do here.