Merchant refuses to honour a warranty return, what can I do?

Guss

Just over 12 months ago I bought a waterproof jacket for my cycle commute to work. It's not been used very much at all but 10 months in I noticed it had begun to leak and subsequently noticed the sealed zipper had let in some water too. It's probably fine for short commutes but for day rides I wouldn't be confident in using it. After exchanging a total of about 11 emails including photos in which I found the shop to be arrogant and patronising they have refused to authorise a return. I contacted my bank and asked about reversing the transaction but according to First Direct this needs to be done in the first 120 days.
The US manufacturer of the jacket said that since I'm based in the UK they do not have a direct way to honour my claim but suggested I try and return it via another shop they have listed on their website. Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!
What can I do?

jonesey1985

No, but they can insist you supply an engineers report stating it is inherently faulty.

Invoking your consumer rights could be difficult.  Is returning it via the "other" retailer that difficult?  It sounds like the easier option.

Sandtree

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

visidigi

Guss said:

Just over 12 months ago I bought a waterproof jacket for my cycle commute to work. It's not been used very much at all but 10 months in I noticed it had begun to leak and subsequently noticed the sealed zipper had let in some water too. It's probably fine for short commutes but for day rides I wouldn't be confident in using it. After exchanging a total of about 11 emails including photos in which I found the shop to be arrogant and patronising they have refused to authorise a return. I contacted my bank and asked about reversing the transaction but according to First Direct this needs to be done in the first 120 days.
The US manufacturer of the jacket said that since I'm based in the UK they do not have a direct way to honour my claim but suggested I try and return it via another shop they have listed on their website. Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!
What can I do?

Did the manufacturer say it was a manufacturing fault when approached? If so then the store really shouldn't be refusing the accept it as the will be reimbursed.

Guss

Sandtree said:

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show 

Could you pinpoint to where consumer legislation states this. Not that I don't believe you but I've never heard of this.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Hardly worth if for an £80 jacket so not a practical route I'm afraid.

Guss

visidigi said:

Guss said:

Just over 12 months ago I bought a waterproof jacket for my cycle commute to work. It's not been used very much at all but 10 months in I noticed it had begun to leak and subsequently noticed the sealed zipper had let in some water too. It's probably fine for short commutes but for day rides I wouldn't be confident in using it. After exchanging a total of about 11 emails including photos in which I found the shop to be arrogant and patronising they have refused to authorise a return. I contacted my bank and asked about reversing the transaction but according to First Direct this needs to be done in the first 120 days.
The US manufacturer of the jacket said that since I'm based in the UK they do not have a direct way to honour my claim but suggested I try and return it via another shop they have listed on their website. Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!
What can I do?

Did the manufacturer say it was a manufacturing fault when approached? If so then the store really shouldn't be refusing the accept it as the will be reimbursed.

No. But manufacturers often need to be dragged to court kicking and screaming before they'll admit fault as history repeatedly shows.

jonesey1985

Guss said:

Sandtree said:

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show 

Could you pinpoint to where consumer legislation states this. Not that I don't believe you but I've never heard of this.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Hardly worth if for an £80 jacket so not a practical route I'm afraid.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted

(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.

As goods older than 6 months are not automatically believed to have not conformed from day one then it's up to you show that they didn't, if the retailer asks.

Guss

jonesey1985 said:

Guss said:

Sandtree said:

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show 

Could you pinpoint to where consumer legislation states this. Not that I don't believe you but I've never heard of this.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Hardly worth if for an £80 jacket so not a practical route I'm afraid.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted

(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.

As goods older than 6 months are not automatically believed to have not conformed from day one then it's up to you show that they didn't, if the retailer asks.

How is any legally untrained person supposed to read this legislation and make sense of it. For example does the legislation you quoted apply to goods i.e. performance clothing/domestic applicances?

If so then doesn't this undermine typical 12 month guarantees?

Alderbank

Guss said:

jonesey1985 said:

Guss said:

Sandtree said:

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show 

Could you pinpoint to where consumer legislation states this. Not that I don't believe you but I've never heard of this.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Hardly worth if for an £80 jacket so not a practical route I'm afraid.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted

(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.

As goods older than 6 months are not automatically believed to have not conformed from day one then it's up to you show that they didn't, if the retailer asks.

How is any legally untrained person supposed to read this legislation and make sense of it. For example does the legislation you quoted apply to goods i.e. performance clothing/domestic applicances?

If so then doesn't this undermine typical 12 month guarantees?

There are a lot of helpful websites which explain the legislation. A good place to start Guss was founded by Martin Lewis and is called Money Saving Expert.
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim-consumer-rights/ 
Their pages called Shopping and Consumer Rights will tell you all you need to know. As a bonus, when you return much wiser you will have learnt what a SAD FART is

user1977

Guss said:

jonesey1985 said:

Guss said:

Sandtree said:

Guss said:
Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!

What can I do?

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show the item is faulty/not suitably durable and not that its acceptable performance/user damage/misuse etc. Obviously not seen your photo(s) but instinctively doubt they will be sufficient to prove the above.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Clearly it would be easier in the first instance to try what the manufacturer has suggested (and make the other shop aware its the manufacturers suggestion)

Yes, after 6 months its the consumers responsibility to show 

Could you pinpoint to where consumer legislation states this. Not that I don't believe you but I've never heard of this.

Its not uncommon for the route of proof to be an independent experts report, if the report supports your position then you can add the cost of the report to your claim against them.

Hardly worth if for an £80 jacket so not a practical route I'm afraid.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted

(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.

As goods older than 6 months are not automatically believed to have not conformed from day one then it's up to you show that they didn't, if the retailer asks.

How is any legally untrained person supposed to read this legislation and make sense of it.

You don't need to, you could instead read any of the simpler guides (such as the one on this very website).

For example does the legislation you quoted apply to goods i.e. performance clothing/domestic applicances?

Yes, "goods" means just about any goods. To be exact, the definition is here:
"2 Key definitions
...
(8)“Goods” means any tangible moveable items, but that includes water, gas and electricity if and only if they are put up for supply in a limited volume or set quantity."

If so then doesn't this undermine typical 12 month guarantees?

No, your statutory rights are in addition to whatever rights are granted to you by other guarantees.

visidigi

Guss said:

visidigi said:

Guss said:

Just over 12 months ago I bought a waterproof jacket for my cycle commute to work. It's not been used very much at all but 10 months in I noticed it had begun to leak and subsequently noticed the sealed zipper had let in some water too. It's probably fine for short commutes but for day rides I wouldn't be confident in using it. After exchanging a total of about 11 emails including photos in which I found the shop to be arrogant and patronising they have refused to authorise a return. I contacted my bank and asked about reversing the transaction but according to First Direct this needs to be done in the first 120 days.
The US manufacturer of the jacket said that since I'm based in the UK they do not have a direct way to honour my claim but suggested I try and return it via another shop they have listed on their website. Is it right that the store I bought the product from based only on photographic evidence can refuse to take a product back? They basically insinuated I was lying or/and accused me of not wearing the jacket appropriately!
What can I do?

Did the manufacturer say it was a manufacturing fault when approached? If so then the store really shouldn't be refusing the accept it as the will be reimbursed.

No. But manufacturers often need to be dragged to court kicking and screaming before they'll admit fault as history repeatedly shows.

Did you ask?

I mean you do seem to be expecting the process to just be in your favour a bit here - don't ask don't get sometimes.

Sometimes a polite email indicating the problem and a reluctance of a brand representative to deal with the complaint effectively can go a long way...