Warranty claim - they have lost my item and are only offering refund not replacement

HillStreetBlues

I agree with others a full refund is a great offer.

You might have to add extra money to another one but it will be new and  that suitcase won't annoy you

marchesini46

Appreciate all the responses. I think my main gripe is with that DaKine have this warranty policy:

Limited Lifetime Warranty: Packs & Bags (North America & Europe)

Dakine offers a 10 year Limited Lifetime Warranty against manufacturing defects within the normal scope of use.

Dakine will replace, at its discretion, any products found to be defective within the scope of normal and appropriate utilization and still within the lifespan of the product. Dakine will not be responsible for any costs, losses or damages incurred because of loss or misuse of the product. Dakine does not offer refunds for honored claims. A discount code will be provided.

Dakine is not responsible for damages caused by transit damage. if the product is damaged by an airline or transportation company, please contact the transport company directly and immediately following the incident. 

I was trying to claim against this warranty and only seeking a replacement - not a refund.  DaKine even state they will not offer a refund and will only replace the item. I am confident that they would find that the suitcase was defective and replace. I have been consistent with the reseller from the outset that I would not accept a refund so they offered to collect the suitcase to be checked for a repair.  

DPD have proof that the suitcase was collected and delivered so I can only assume that the defective suitcase has got lost by the reseller.  They are disputing this despite photo evidence to the contrary.  This in turn means that the original manufacturer can not inspect the goods and so I cannot claim under the manufacturers 10 year warranty.  The goods going missing are no fault of mine and if I was aware of this sequence of events, I would have just persevered with the suitcase and accepted it and not returned it.  As it is now, I can't even get my suitcase returned and they seem to not be accepting any responsibility for losing my case at all.

I know principles are different to consumer law but surely the reseller must bear some responsibility to losing my suitcase.  All I wanted was my suitcase repaired and now find I'm out of pocket due to their error and now spending waaaay too much time arguing with countless 'customer service' agents.  

marchesini46

Exodi said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

You should be satisfied with a full refund on a six year old product, that's very generous.  You will have effectively had free hire of a suitcase for six years.

Ayr_Rage said:

Take the refund whilst it is still on offer, it's a good result for such an old product.

WhiskersTheWonderCat said:

I need to know which retailer this was. Offering a full refund after 6 years would make me want to buy from them. That's exceptionally generous. 

DullGreyGuy said:

Getting a full refund after coming up to 6 years is an exceptionally good outcome for the OP

cmthephoenix said:

I think I would agree with the majority of others of taking the offered refund without deduction of use (which could be quite substantial for a 6 year old suitcase) and running before they change their mind.

Similar to all of the above, I'd absolutely bite a retailers arm off if they offered a full refund on a product after 6 years!!

The fact the OP decided to push this onto Trustpilot and Resolver will probably leave many people scratching their heads.

This is one of the rare occassions I have sympathy for the retailer, sometimes there is no pleasing people...

I think reading this, the OP should at least consider removing the negative review (though unfortunately I suspect they won't).

The point is that I have always said that I would not accept a refund - despite may saying it is a fair and reasonable offer, and would not have sent the suitcase back if I would have known that they would not have insured it adequately.  It is their fault they have lost my suitcase and through their fault, I cannot get the suitcase replaced (not refunded) under the 10 year DaKine warranty policy.  That is my issue and it would not matter that it was 9 years and 11 months old, I would still maintain that the manufacturer should honour that but because the reseller has lost the suitcase, I am not able to claim under the 10 year warranty and am out of pocket.

DullGreyGuy

marchesini46 said:

Dakine will replace, at its discretion, 

The get out clause which says the warranty is really worth nothing. They could simply choose not to have replaced it even if it had made it back to them by exercising that discretion

The retailer are accepting responsibility for losing the case, they are offering a full refund. Technically they could have reduced the value of the refund to reflect 5 years worth of use... as mentioned earlier JL's formula for this is months age / 72 and so if it was exactly 60 months old then you'd only be getting back 17%

MattMattMattUK

marchesini46 said:

Exodi said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

You should be satisfied with a full refund on a six year old product, that's very generous.  You will have effectively had free hire of a suitcase for six years.

Ayr_Rage said:

Take the refund whilst it is still on offer, it's a good result for such an old product.

WhiskersTheWonderCat said:

I need to know which retailer this was. Offering a full refund after 6 years would make me want to buy from them. That's exceptionally generous. 

DullGreyGuy said:

Getting a full refund after coming up to 6 years is an exceptionally good outcome for the OP

cmthephoenix said:

I think I would agree with the majority of others of taking the offered refund without deduction of use (which could be quite substantial for a 6 year old suitcase) and running before they change their mind.

Similar to all of the above, I'd absolutely bite a retailers arm off if they offered a full refund on a product after 6 years!!

The fact the OP decided to push this onto Trustpilot and Resolver will probably leave many people scratching their heads.

This is one of the rare occassions I have sympathy for the retailer, sometimes there is no pleasing people...

I think reading this, the OP should at least consider removing the negative review (though unfortunately I suspect they won't).

The point is that I have always said that I would not accept a refund - despite may saying it is a fair and reasonable offer, and would not have sent the suitcase back if I would have known that they would not have insured it adequately.  It is their fault they have lost my suitcase and through their fault, I cannot get the suitcase replaced (not refunded) under the 10 year DaKine warranty policy.  That is my issue and it would not matter that it was 9 years and 11 months old, I would still maintain that the manufacturer should honour that but because the reseller has lost the suitcase, I am not able to claim under the 10 year warranty and am out of pocket.

That is not the point though, what you want is not required under the law. They are offering you a full refund after you have had six years usage, that puts you in the same position you were before, with the benefit of six years of usage on top. They have lost them, that means that they cannot give them back to you, but they have offered you a full refund, you are not out of pocket. 

Alderbank

marchesini46 said:

Appreciate all the responses. I think my main gripe is with that DaKine have this warranty policy:

Dakine will replace, at its discretion, any products found to be defective within the scope of normal and appropriate utilization and still within the lifespan of the product.

It seems clear to me that it is at Dakine's discretion whether they will replace any products. What other interpretation can the OP put on this?

'Still within the lifespan of the product' is an interesting one. I have seen this before on similar warranties. The warrantor means that in the event of a claim they will take a replacement item from the production line or warehouse to replace the faulty one. If the product is no longer made then this would be frustrated, they can't supply what they haven't got. The warranty does say that they don't have to give any alternative.

In the OP's case Dakine is not backtracking on its policy, it is offering more than the warranty.

The moral is that unlike your consumer rights, which are the same for every contract, a manufacturer's warranty is whatever they want it to be, no more and no less.

HillStreetBlues

This thread might be setting a MSE record.
Someone complaining that they are getting a full refund after 5 years.

marchesini46

Alderbank said:

marchesini46 said:

Appreciate all the responses. I think my main gripe is with that DaKine have this warranty policy:

Dakine will replace, at its discretion, any products found to be defective within the scope of normal and appropriate utilization and still within the lifespan of the product.

It seems clear to me that it is at Dakine's discretion whether they will replace any products. What other interpretation can the OP put on this?

'Still within the lifespan of the product' is an interesting one. I have seen this before on similar warranties. The warrantor means that in the event of a claim they will take a replacement item from the production line or warehouse to replace the faulty one. If the product is no longer made then this would be frustrated, they can't supply what they haven't got. The warranty does say that they don't have to give any alternative.

In the OP's case Dakine is not backtracking on its policy, it is offering more than the warranty.

The moral is that unlike your consumer rights, which are the same for every contract, a manufacturer's warranty is whatever they want it to be, no more and no less.

I'll be clear that DaKine are unaware that any fault exists with their product because they never got the chance to inspect the goods due to the reseller losing the defective products.  I have no issue with DaKine and they may, as many have pointed out may say it wasn't not defective and I would be back where I started. However, that opportunity to get the case repaired or replaced was taken out of my hands due to the reseller losing my suitcase.  Granted, it may not be intentional but they are at fault as DPD have proof that the product was delivered.

My issue is with the reseller where I have been consistent that I have zero interest in a refund and only a repair or replacement would be acceptable. For all those who are saying that "it's a good offer for 6 year old goods", that is not the point as I have already stated I don't want a refund as I know I cannot purchase a suitcase for the refund amount.  I only returned the goods when the seller offered to get the goods inspected.  If this offer was not made, I would never have sent the suitcase and kept my suitcase and 'made do'.  

However, I seem to be in the minority as no-one seems to be acknowledging the fact that I cannot claim on the 10 year warranty rights on the the product due to a reseller error. 

For what it's worth, I have Burton snowboard bindings which must be 10 years old and the back binding broke.  I contacted Burton about getting them repaired and they sent me out two brand new hi-back bindings, all completely FOC. No receipts, proof of purchase or arguments where needed, just a manufacturer standing by their lifetime warranty. This opportunity to even have the conversation with DaKine has been taken away by the reseller losing my suitcase.

DullGreyGuy

marchesini46 said:
For what it's worth, I have Burton snowboard bindings which must be 10 years old and the back binding broke.  I contacted Burton about getting them repaired and they sent me out two brand new hi-back bindings, all completely FOC. No receipts, proof of purchase or arguments where needed, just a manufacturer standing by their lifetime warranty. This opportunity to even have the conversation with DaKine has been taken away by the reseller losing my suitcase.

If your claiming on a manufacturers warranty why send it via the retailer? Appreciate some manufacturer warranties are serviced via their country level distributor and/or "official" retailers.

There are good companies out there, they are often not the cheapest companies out there though and when your margins are so much higher its easier to be more generous in the after sales arena. 

In my world its the same, you'll find lots of stories of Hiscox Insurance going well beyond whats needed (hiring divers to look for a watch because it had sentimental value, paying out on expensive silk scarves just because the box had water damage etc) but then to get near identical cover for my home would be 4x the price with Hiscox than it is with Aviva. 

marchesini46

DullGreyGuy said:

marchesini46 said:
For what it's worth, I have Burton snowboard bindings which must be 10 years old and the back binding broke.  I contacted Burton about getting them repaired and they sent me out two brand new hi-back bindings, all completely FOC. No receipts, proof of purchase or arguments where needed, just a manufacturer standing by their lifetime warranty. This opportunity to even have the conversation with DaKine has been taken away by the reseller losing my suitcase.

If your claiming on a manufacturers warranty why send it via the retailer? Appreciate some manufacturer warranties are serviced via their country level distributor and/or "official" retailers.

There are good companies out there, they are often not the cheapest companies out there though and when your margins are so much higher its easier to be more generous in the after sales arena. 

In my world its the same, you'll find lots of stories of Hiscox Insurance going well beyond whats needed (hiring divers to look for a watch because it had sentimental value, paying out on expensive silk scarves just because the box had water damage etc) but then to get near identical cover for my home would be 4x the price with Hiscox than it is with Aviva. 

It was sent via the retailer by their request (reseller).  I took them at their word and assumed that the suitcase would be suitably insured - which is irrelevant anyway as DPD have already proved they are not at fault. I may be naive but was confident that DaKine would inspect the suitcase and see that it has not been used incorrectly.  That's why I almost always pay the extra for brand names as they (in my experience) stand by their products. By the reseller losing my product, they have taken away my opportunity to rectify the situation with the DaKine.  That is my whole point of this - not whether or not a refund is a 'good offer'.