Consumer rights act and faulty goods

ro1892

I have a couple of questions about the consumer rights act 2015 and faulty goods. I understand that if an item develops a fault 30 days after receiving (bit within 6 months) it then the customer is entitled to a replacement or repair (unless the seller can prove the customer has caused the fault). 

Can the seller request to wait for the item to be returned before sending a replacement?

In terms of sending the item back, what if the seller won't send a courier and expects the customer to pay out of their own pocket and says they will reimburse (I have a feeling they may not repay the postage, and don't believe I'd be able to do a chargeback/section 75 for the postage cost)?

In terms of the 6 months, does the clock stop ticking until the customer receives the repair/replacement? For example if the item broke on day 40, and it took 3 weeks to sort a replacement, then would the 6 months referred to in the consumer rights act be 6 months from the date the original item was delivered? Or would the clock stop when the customer reports the fault, and restart when they receive a repair/replacement?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Hello OP

The trader can request the goods be returned first, it needs to be at their cost, either by way of them arranging the return or refunding the costs back afterwards. 

ro1892 said:

In terms of the 6 months, does the clock stop ticking until the customer receives the repair/replacement? For example if the item broke on day 40, and it took 3 weeks to sort a replacement, then would the 6 months referred to in the consumer rights act be 6 months from the date the original item was delivered? Or would the clock stop when the customer reports the fault, and restart when they receive a repair/replacement?

Which 6 months are you referring to OP? There are two

1) Burden of proof, within 6 months it's taken the goods have an issue unless the trader shows otherwise, that would apply to when you contact them about the issue (otherwise they could simply always wait it out and then say 6 months have past your turn to prove).

2) Whether a refund can be reduced for usage, this applies at the point in time that you would exercise the final right to reject so could extend past 6 months whilst they carry out testing or a repair/replace, however they have to do testing/repair/replace within a reasonable time and so you can exercise that final right to reject when the waiting has become unreasonable. 

Both are from the date you took possession of the goods and neither restart   

ro1892

Thank you. I'll push for them to arrange a courier as I have a feeling if I do then I'll not see that money again, and it wouldn't be worth pursuing a claim for an amount that small.

Regarding the 6 months I was thinking of the following hypothetical scenario:

* Item arrives on 1 August 23
* Item develops a fault and is unusable on 6 September 23
* Fault is reported to the seller on 6 September 23
* Due to communication back and forth, arranging a return, waiting for replacement etc, the replacement arrives on 5 October 23

I understand that if the replacement/repair develops a fault within 6 months then you can reject for a refund, but if the 6 months starts from the date of delivery of the original item (1 August in this example), then there's been almost 1 month of the 6 month period where the customer has not been able to use the item, so if the replacement developed a fault after 1 February then the customer could not reject it (even though they have only had 5 months usage).

What would be a reasonable timeframe for returning plus replacement before going down the chargeback/section 75 route?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

ro1892 said:

I understand that if the replacement/repair develops a fault within 6 months then you can reject for a refund, 

There's no time limit at all to reject the replacement, you could reject the replacement after 5 years (assuming the product should last longer than 5 years and 5 months), the only two issues you'd face is burden of proof on yourself and a reduction in the refund for use if longer than 6 months from taking possession  

ro1892 said:

What would be a reasonable timeframe for returning plus replacement 

Really depends on the item, most of us could live without TV for a few weeks but a mattress or fridge and it could be different. 

A chargeback would require the goods to be returned and the retailer can contest (I'm not sure upon which basis for not as described), S75 on the other hand places the same liability upon the credit provider as the retailer, I don't think (although not 100% sure) you have to wait for anything if looking to go down S75. 

born_again

Well without knowing item cost can't say on S75. But they could argue that you have to return.

Chargeback for faulty is it has to be faulty when received, not develop a fault later on. But even so item has to be returned unless retailer is being obstructive & not allowing return. As you indicated  this is not claimable via a chargeback, only the debit amount can be recovered.

ro1892

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There's no time limit at all to reject the replacement, you could reject the replacement after 5 years (assuming the product should last longer than 5 years and 5 months), the only two issues you'd face is burden of proof on yourself and a reduction in the refund for use if longer than 6 months from taking possession   

Regarding the burden proof and partial refund, if the replacement developed a fault within 4 months of delivery of replacement but over 6 months have elapsed since delivery of the original faulty item, does that mean the burden of proof is on the consumer?

born_again said:

Well without knowing item cost can't say on S75. But they could argue that you have to return.

Chargeback for faulty is it has to be faulty when received, not develop a fault later on. But even so item has to be returned unless retailer is being obstructive & not allowing return. As you indicated  this is not claimable via a chargeback, only the debit amount can be recovered.

Looks like it will have to be section 75 route if I get no luck with the retailer then. Cost was £220 and paid all on credit card so well over the £100 required for section 75.

I'll give the retailer 7 days, and if it still looks like they're still stalling then, I'll contact my bank and try and start a section 75.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

ro1892 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There's no time limit at all to reject the replacement, you could reject the replacement after 5 years (assuming the product should last longer than 5 years and 5 months), the only two issues you'd face is burden of proof on yourself and a reduction in the refund for use if longer than 6 months from taking possession   

Regarding the burden proof and partial refund, if the replacement developed a fault within 4 months of delivery of replacement but over 6 months have elapsed since delivery of the original faulty item, does that mean the burden of proof is on the consumer?

That's correct yes  

ro1892

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

ro1892 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There's no time limit at all to reject the replacement, you could reject the replacement after 5 years (assuming the product should last longer than 5 years and 5 months), the only two issues you'd face is burden of proof on yourself and a reduction in the refund for use if longer than 6 months from taking possession   

Regarding the burden proof and partial refund, if the replacement developed a fault within 4 months of delivery of replacement but over 6 months have elapsed since delivery of the original faulty item, does that mean the burden of proof is on the consumer?

That's correct yes  

So the retailer doesn't have any incentive to quickly arrange a replacement in that case. They might as well take their time so the 6 month clock ticks down and if the replacement breaks then it's on the consumer to prove. Feels like a bit of a loophole if you ask me

DullGreyGuy

ro1892 said:

I understand that if the replacement/repair develops a fault within 6 months then you can reject for a refund, but if the 6 months starts from the date of delivery of the original item (1 August in this example), then there's been almost 1 month of the 6 month period where the customer has not been able to use the item, so if the replacement developed a fault after 1 February then the customer could not reject it (even though they have only had 5 months usage).

What would be a reasonable timeframe for returning plus replacement before going down the chargeback/section 75 route?

No matter when, subject to the statute of limitations, the replacement develops a fault you are within your rights to reject the goods. The only relevance of the 6 months, which I believe would be from the original purchase, is who the burden of proof lies with... within 6 months its up to them to prove you broke it or its fair wear and after 6 months its up to you to prove its faulty. Clearly both directions can be contested by the other party if they disagree with the evidence.

If you go via your bank they'll almost certainly do a chargeback, if you are within the time limits which may mean you just get an invoice from the company a few weeks later (as per the post today about someone with damage to a Hertz hire car that they chargebacked)

ro1892

DullGreyGuy said:

ro1892 said:

I understand that if the replacement/repair develops a fault within 6 months then you can reject for a refund, but if the 6 months starts from the date of delivery of the original item (1 August in this example), then there's been almost 1 month of the 6 month period where the customer has not been able to use the item, so if the replacement developed a fault after 1 February then the customer could not reject it (even though they have only had 5 months usage).

What would be a reasonable timeframe for returning plus replacement before going down the chargeback/section 75 route?

No matter when, subject to the statute of limitations, the replacement develops a fault you are within your rights to reject the goods. The only relevance of the 6 months, which I believe would be from the original purchase, is who the burden of proof lies with... within 6 months its up to them to prove you broke it or its fair wear and after 6 months its up to you to prove its faulty. Clearly both directions can be contested by the other party if they disagree with the evidence.

If you go via your bank they'll almost certainly do a chargeback, if you are within the time limits which may mean you just get an invoice from the company a few weeks later (as per the post today about someone with damage to a Hertz hire car that they chargebacked)

I'd hope that if both the original and the replacement both failed within 4 months of delivery, it would point to a faulty product/design fault so might be easier to argue 

According to @born_again I don't believe I can do a chargeback here as the item wasn't faulty on arrival but developed a fault after 38 days. I'll ask the bank to do a section 75 rather than chargeback so there's less chance of receiving an invoice from the retailer.

born_again said:

Well without knowing item cost can't say on S75. But they could argue that you have to return.

Chargeback for faulty is it has to be faulty when received, not develop a fault later on. But even so item has to be returned unless retailer is being obstructive & not allowing return. As you indicated  this is not claimable via a chargeback, only the debit amount can be recovered.

born_again

Just remember S75 requires a item price of over £100. (not including P&P etc)