Credit note vs Cash refund

T21JMF

Took some swimming goggles back today to sports direct. Both pairs weren’t fit for purpose as on both pairs the straps kept coming loose within minutes of putting them on. The staff member saw where they’d come loose but said they weren’t faulty, I replied telling her they weren’t fit for purpose as they couldn’t be used. Anyhow she issued me with a credit note even though I provided the receipt. My husband however has said that even though that’s written as their store refund policy because they weren’t fit for purpose I was entitled to refuse the credit note and insist on a cash refund (I paid cash initially). It’s too late now to change this but would like to know for future reference if this is the case, especially for items I’ve bought from this store as it’s happened a few times now and every time they’ve told me a credit note is they’re only method of refund.
Thank you

[Deleted User]

Certainly, with faulty items you have the right to a full refund.

You, however, were arguing that the goods were "not fit for purpose" which the retailer could argue was not the case.

mije1983

If they are faulty then yes, your husband is correct.

Were they coming loose due to a fault, or due to another reason (too big etc). If the latter then they are fit for purpose, just not suitable for your needs. They may not be fit for your purpose, but that's not what is meant by 'fit for purpose' in this legal sense. If that is the case then you are at the mercy of whatever policy the retailer has, and in this instance it is a credit note refund.

KeithP

In this situation try and avoid the word 'faulty'.

The sentence to use would be something like:

"The goods do not conform to contract, therefore I would like a refund please".

Shaka_Zulu

KeithP wrote: »

In this situation try and avoid the word 'faulty'.

The sentence to use would be something like:

"The goods do not conform to contract, therefore I would like a refund please".

And how does the buyer respond to the follow up question.

"In what way do they not conform to contract?"

KeithP

The point I was making is that the word faulty does not even appear in The Consumer Rights Act 2015.

I'll leave you to advise the OP further.

DoaM

What you have stated is correct ... the CRA does indeed talk about goods conforming to contract.

It was still a fair question though ... the seller can legitimately ask how the goods do not conform to contract. "Faulty" is one such non-conformance; "Not as described" is another, as is "Not fit for purpose" (although this one can be more difficult to button down ... HOW are they not fit for purpose?)

To the OP ... was there any size guide for the googles? Is it possible that they were too small for the intended person?

unholyangel

DoaM wrote: »

What you have stated is correct ... the CRA does indeed talk about goods conforming to contract.

It was still a fair question though ... the seller can legitimately ask how the goods do not conform to contract. "Faulty" is one such non-conformance; "Not as described" is another, as is "Not fit for purpose" (although this one can be more difficult to button down ... HOW are they not fit for purpose?)

To the OP ... was there any size guide for the googles? Is it possible that they were too small for the intended person?

Faulty just means it doesn't work as it should. I could throw a dvd player down the stairs and it would likely end up faulty, wouldn't have any rights against the retailer for it though because the goods didn't fail to conform