£4000.00 bike that does not like water

Itisiceman

I an 57 years old and a very experienced cyclist.
I purchased a new Electric Giant mountain bike from a local dealer for £4,000
I rode it 3 times but could hear water in the frame.
I took it back to the bike shop within the 28 day period.
On returning the bike they were very rude and said it was my fault for washing it wrongly..!
I said I did not wash it incorrectly and how did water get in the frame, and if it did surely it should come out again.
I said I have lost confidence in the product and would like a full refund that I would spend in the same shop.
They said they do not give refunds but would give me a credit note less £250 for use of the bike...?
Saying there was sand in all the bearings in the forks as I forced sand in when washing the bike incorrectly with a hosepipe,
A £4000 mountain bike.
I got the washing instructions from Giants own website I explained but they still blamed me. 
Saying they had recorded me saying I washed it incorrectly....I did not and I was not aware of being recorded on the phone.
I refused the credit note and said I would accept the £250 loss but not the credit note after being treated and spoken to so badly would make future relations very hard to deal with.
They replied with this...
Our returns policy only offers a credit note and we are making an exception to the rule for you by allowing you to exchange a used bicycle, this is not us having it both ways, we are actually worse off. The £250 is only a contribution towards the reduction in value, we are having to accept the lion’s share of the reduction. It is simply not viable offering you a refund as well.

Sandtree

Given the water in the frame was after 3 rides what is your theory of how it got in and didnt get out?

You need to be careful on what grounds you are returning it, if you are returning it simply because you have lost faith in the product then you will be down to their T&Cs. If you are returning it because it is faulty or not fit for purpose then you have 30 days to exercise your short term rights to reject the goods. under the Consumer Rights Act. 

Some sources do indicate that in this initial period it is up to you to show that the goods have an issue if the merchant requests. Ordinarily this is achieved via a third party expert report.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Why would they offer you a refund at all, especially considering they are claiming to be losing out, if they felt the issue was due to misuse would be my question.

OP you have two choices, reject outright for a full refund within 30 days of receipt and face the possibility of demonstrating the goods did not conform to the contract if the retailer requests such.

The other option is to put the ball in their court and accept a repair, replacement or full refund at their choice, if they disagree that the goods did not conform to the contract it would then be up to them to show this. 

If you go for either option and they refuse then letter before action and small claims. A shop full of expensive bikes would be foolish to fight a claim they aren't certain of winning.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted#section-19-4

(3)If the goods do not conform to the contract because of a breach of any of the terms described in sections 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14, or if they do not conform to the contract under section 16, the consumer’s rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—

(a)the short-term right to reject (sections 20 and 22);

(b)the right to repair or replacement (section 23); and

(c)the right to a price reduction or the final right to reject (sections 20 and 24).

(14)For the purposes of subsections (3)(b) and (c) and (4), goods which do not conform to the contract at any time within the period of six months beginning with the day on which the goods were delivered to the consumer must be taken not to have conformed to it on that day.

(15)Subsection (14) does not apply if—

(a)it is established that the goods did conform to the contract on that day, or

(b)

its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or with how they fail to conform to the contract. 

(As paragraph 14 does not mention 3(a)  it is taken that this does not apply to the short-term right to reject)

neilmcl

Sandtree said:

Given the water in the frame was after 3 rides what is your theory of how it got in and didnt get out?

You need to be careful on what grounds you are returning it, if you are returning it simply because you have lost faith in the product then you will be down to their T&Cs. If you are returning it because it is faulty or not fit for purpose then you have 30 days to exercise your short term rights to reject the goods. under the Consumer Rights Act. 

Some sources do indicate that in this initial period it is up to you to show that the goods have an issue if the merchant requests. Ordinarily this is achieved via a third party expert report.

Some sources, as in the regulations themselves.

Sandtree

neilmcl said:

Some sources, as in the regulations themselves.

That would be a good one... but not wanting to have another endless debate it was easier to leave open the possibility that I may be incorrect if someone else decided to come along and state that whilst the legislation doesn't state something it does imply it and therefore it must be true.

neilmcl

Another option would be to contact the manufacturer directly and see what they think of the issue, I assume there's a manufacturer's warranty in place.

Also you may want to read the following, taken from a Giant E-bike user manual:

Keep_pedalling

As an experience cyclist, you should know that bike frames do not have drain holes, if water does get into the frame it will not drain out. If frames had a hole at the lowest point it would guarantee water ingress. 

Manxman_in_exile

And did you wash it according to Giant's instructions?  You say you got the instructions off their website but not that you followed them.  (Sorry - probably being pedantic, but... )

Can't the dealer drain the frame and then see if it happens again?  (Sorry, but I'm not familiar with e-bikes and how easy this would be - I'd just take the seatpost off my bike and turn it upside down). 

Keep_pedalling

Manxman_in_exile said:

And did you wash it according to Giant's instructions?  You say you got the instructions off their website but not that you followed them.  (Sorry - probably being pedantic, but... )

Can't the dealer drain the frame and then see if it happens again?  (Sorry, but I'm not familiar with e-bikes and how easy this would be - I'd just take the seatpost off my bike and turn it upside down). 

I doubt anyone reads online bike washing instructions. The frame is made of aluminium so a one off water ingress is not going to cause any damage. As you say, seat post out and turn upside down.

George_Michael

Sandtree said:

neilmcl said:

Some sources, as in the regulations themselves.

That would be a good one... but not wanting to have another endless debate it was easier to leave open the possibility that I may be incorrect if someone else decided to come along and state that whilst the legislation doesn't state something it does imply it and therefore it must be true.

There is nothing to debate.
The CRA clearly state that when a consumer is rejecting goods in the first 30 days, there is no assumption that those goods were faulty at the time of sale, something that the_lunatic... has provided proof for.
This is made perfectly clear in the CRA Explanatory notes:
Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Explanatory Notes (legislation.gov.uk)

97.Subsections (14) and (15) provide that, if a breach of the statutory rights – for example a fault - arises in the first 6 months from delivery, it is presumed to have been present at the time of delivery unless the trader proves otherwise or this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the particular breach or fault. This applies where the consumer exercises their right to a repair or replacement or their right to a price reduction or the final right to reject. This does not apply where the consumer exercises the short-term right to reject. These subsections correspond to section 48A(3) and (4) of the SGA and section 11M(3) and (4) of the SGSA.

Sandtree

George_Michael said:

There is nothing to debate.

You are stepping into a debate off of another thread where Neil stated that because subsection 14 talks about issues being present at the point of delivery that it implies that the consumer must prove the issue was present at the point of delivery if the fault happens after 6 months... was really not wanting to reopen the old debate but he seems to enjoy it despite claiming to being confused as to why there is a debate.