Consumer rights legislation is flawed - agree? - what next then?

S75change

I’ve just come through a long process of complaining to a retailer about faulty goods. He responded by saying I hadn’t done things correctly (self build summer house) so I had made the Guarantee void. This was not true but he then shut down communication. I had used a credit card so I went down the S75 route - no joy there. Then I used the Financial Ombudsman - no joy there. The merits of my case are not the issue. I have long since decided that under the system that we have the odds are stacked against us.
So, having just joined this Forum, it seems to me that much of it is on the same subject - we hand over money and from then on we Consumers are up against it if we believe we are due a partial or full refund for whatever reason.
By using Section 75 you absolve the retailer and take on a bigger adversary - the Credit Card provider. The Financial Ombudsman is not bound by legal rules despite the fact that he adjudicates on a section of the law.
Do we need changes to the Rules? Do they favour the Retailer too much?  
 I’m thinking of starting a petition for change on the Gov.uk site.
Does anyone agree?

hollydays

Is it just you can't accept you're wrong?Its not what you believe or want that's relevant. It's what the law believes.Of course you could take them to the small claims court if you so wished.

steampowered

No, section 75 is already a very generous scheme in favour of the consumer. It's not really obvious why the banks should have to pick up the tab for dodgy retailers.

If you have a dispute with the retailer, you can bring  a claim against them.

JJ_Egan

Every one that has a fault claims its not me i did nothing wrong its pristine etc .

zoob

Really need really more details off what the issue is and what the product is and how long you had the item before realising there’s an issue 

stragglebod

S75change said:

The merits of my case are not the issue.

The merits of your case are the issue.

MobileSaver

S75change said:

I’ve just come through a long process of complaining to a retailer about faulty goods. He responded by saying I hadn’t done things correctly
Do we need changes to the Rules? Do they favour the Retailer too much? 

No, if anything the current regulations favour the customer too much.

The real problem is this pervading attitude of "it's always someone else's fault." More and more people just won't accept they themselves got something wrong and will explore every avenue in an effort to blame someone else; a case in point being your example where the seller, the bank and the ombudsman have all said you have no valid claim but you still won't accept it.

As others have said, if they are all wrong and you do have a genuine case then sue the seller in court; there's no need for any change in the law.

davidmcn

S75change said:

Do we need changes to the Rules? Do they favour the Retailer too much?

What exactly are the changes you want? If you're entitled to a refund (or replacement/repair) you can go to court to enforce that.

mattyprice4004

As a retailer of 7 years, I can assure you that the various bits of statute regarding consumer rights are not stacked in favour of the customer - I've had to deal with some rather ridiculous claims over the years thanks to our shaky legislation. 

As a customer, I've always felt I have good protection. As a retailer, not so much... 

In addition, you haven't used the biggest and most powerful tool available to you - the Small Claims process. That'd probably have at least got some response from the trader. 

zoob

mattyprice4004 said:

As a retailer of 7 years, I can assure you that the various bits of statute regarding consumer rights are not stacked in favour of the customer 

Personally I believe consumer rights for in store purchases are about right, the issue is customers own perceived rights, demands and expectations  

powerful_Rogue

Somtimes I think the Consumer Rights go too far.