Macbook order gone wrong

HillStreetBlues

Alderbank said:

HillStreetBlues said:

macman said:

Alternatively, you could simply take delivery and resell it as 'new in box'. Apple products hold their value pretty well and your losses might be minimal, or even zero, if it's still sealed.

The danger is then OP takes on the risk.

Takes on risk of what?

OP is not a trader as defined in consumer legislation. They describe the machine accurately and say 'Bought in error. New, sealed in box.' They don't have to give any warranties, return policies, etc.

I've seen plenty of sellers (private) on ebay forums  complaining  that they have sent a new item,  buyer opens claim as "not as described" buyer sends back old laptop. ebay rules in buyers favour when seller objects.

macman

It's not just any old laptop though. It's a Macbook, and you would certainly get much more than 80% of the retail value for it. 
It's all about perceived value, and the fact that these machines are not discounted when new, because Apple don't allow it.
And I wasn't for a moment suggesting selling it on eBay. Much better to sell it locally through FB MP, Gumtree etc, so that the buyer can see it and verify it before paying. Cash or bank transfer only, obvs.

Hoenir

RefluentBeans said:

platform14 said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

platform14 said:

Vectis said:

platform14 said:

...I basically want a better macbook than the spec I've ordered. I don't want to be stuck with this one. But their t&cs naturally make it very difficult to get out of it...

So, why did you order it if you clearly don't want it?

I wanted it at the time. It's been processing for 5 weeks and I've had time to read up on the differences in CPU and GPU (something I didn't understand going in)

The issue is doe it fit the legal meaning of "bespoke"

Did you ask for something special to be added? like a name that means it would be nearly impossible to resell.  or was it simply just selections from a drop down menu?

That’s the issue at hand - the difference between bespoke to the manufacturer (a tailor made suit) vs something that isn’t stocked routinely and ordered in specifically for a customer (a larger pair of ski boots) - as far as I’m aware the law doesn’t make a distinction between these cases/doesn’t explain what is bespoke. 

I do agree that "bespoke" hasn't a legal meaning as such as fair to many variables so would be a case by case basis.
There is guidance on this matter that does give an indication on what "bespoke" means.
With the suit  than I would say  it is, as it would be very hard to sell to someone else.
With the Ski boots it would depend were made specially for that person. If the boots are just ordered in then it's not (in my view) bespoke. Just because a retailer doesn't stock them can't be the  reason they would be bespoke.
 
 

I actually do agree in general - I think it’s a tricky one. The retailer could have the item as dead stock because the customer has changed their mind; and make a loss on it. That also isn’t fair (and is the reason these bespoke exceptions exist). If I ordered a size 16 ski boot (that was prefabricated but not stocked by the retailer regularly) and then cancel it because i decided not to go skiing, then I do think that I should have to mitigate the losses for the retailer. 

But in that case, I would be asking the retailer to order me one in (it’s not a drop down box that can be ordered without contact with the retailer). I do think, generally, if you can order the item ‘at will’ without having to contact anyone in the retailer then it probably doesn’t meet the threshold of ‘bespoke’. 

Why I  don't think boots that weren't made to measure wouldn't be bespoke is  the retailer has options. The retailer doesn't stock that size, the retailer agrees B2B with manufacture that returns are accepted, the retailer takes on the risk.
Just a general "have to order in" wouldn't be enough, as it could be abused far to easily to cut down returns.

RefluentBeans said:

It’s also worth adding (in the OP’s case), for anyone not tech savvy, the new MacBooks are physically impossible to upgrade the memory/CPU/GPU on as it’s all one chip now. This one config isn’t just replacing one component it’s the whole chip that changes - thus it’s not ‘built to order’ as the chips would be fabricated in set SKU’s. 

Thank you for that info.
Do you know if the chips can be reset, so back to a blank canvas?

Chips can’t be reset - certainly not by the user. But at the scale Apple would be making them, it’s not a case of not having enough of them, it’s a case of not having enough of the built units within the operating area (ie Europe vs America vs Asia). 

The lead time on chips are months - that was one of the contributing factors to the spike in prices of cars/computers/TV’s etc in the pandemic - chip fabrication was at max; and there was bidding wars for production so low quality chips (like the ones to operate a car - don’t need much actual processing compared to phones/laptops/PC’s) were priced out, and even big players like Intel and Nvidia couldn’t get stock quickly enough so prices to consumers rose. 

That is to say, there is no way Apple makes a chip on the request of one single order. Unless a customer wants to pay >£10k for a device (*sigh* which I know some people would actually pay for). But it just would also take way too long for an average consumer to want to wait. Then they’d have to actually build the machine - so outside of some minor modifications externally (like a name engraved/serialising the body for businesses to asset track), Apple would just make all of the models in varying quantities based on what they will sell. They know the entry level ones will sell a lot more than the fully specced models so that’s what it’ll be based on. 

I do agree - based on this they aren’t ‘bespoke’ and it should be on retailers to negotiate a returns deal (or buy back) from their suppliers to limit liability. And I guess if they can’t - they need to determine if it’s worth the risk of being left with dead stock. I’d imagine if OP pushes it they will win. 

OP - given you can get Macs from a number of retailers - have you considered that you could feasibly push this all the way to SCC if you wanted? It would be different if there was only a number of stores selling the product but there are many, many, many retailers of Apple products. 

Thanks for this insight. I hadn't considered small claims court, is it worth following a tutorial for this? Im currently awaiting the retailer to respond to my email from yesterday where I stated they're not custom builds but the way you've explained it is even more elegant. 

So the normal process would be to first ensure you’ve exhausted all the internal customer service option. When you feel you have, then you can write a letter before action - which is basically you letting the retailer know you are still unhappy, and intend to take it to court to get a resolution. You should include what you want as a resolution (eg a refund). 

Normally at this stage the company will either fold or they’ll be willing to take it to court (it’s also normally the point where solicitors get involved from the company to advise them if they’ve got a case or if it’s not worth the battle. 

If you do need to file, you can do online and it’s an okay process. 

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/letter/letter-before-small-claims-court-claim-aSFAC8Q6Jqan - this is a pretty good resource to explain the process. 

Companies use commercial lawyers in drafting their terms and conditions of trade at the outset not afterwards. English Law is well established. 

HillStreetBlues

Hoenir said:

RefluentBeans said:

platform14 said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

platform14 said:

Vectis said:

platform14 said:

...I basically want a better macbook than the spec I've ordered. I don't want to be stuck with this one. But their t&cs naturally make it very difficult to get out of it...

So, why did you order it if you clearly don't want it?

I wanted it at the time. It's been processing for 5 weeks and I've had time to read up on the differences in CPU and GPU (something I didn't understand going in)

The issue is doe it fit the legal meaning of "bespoke"

Did you ask for something special to be added? like a name that means it would be nearly impossible to resell.  or was it simply just selections from a drop down menu?

That’s the issue at hand - the difference between bespoke to the manufacturer (a tailor made suit) vs something that isn’t stocked routinely and ordered in specifically for a customer (a larger pair of ski boots) - as far as I’m aware the law doesn’t make a distinction between these cases/doesn’t explain what is bespoke. 

I do agree that "bespoke" hasn't a legal meaning as such as fair to many variables so would be a case by case basis.
There is guidance on this matter that does give an indication on what "bespoke" means.
With the suit  than I would say  it is, as it would be very hard to sell to someone else.
With the Ski boots it would depend were made specially for that person. If the boots are just ordered in then it's not (in my view) bespoke. Just because a retailer doesn't stock them can't be the  reason they would be bespoke.
 
 

I actually do agree in general - I think it’s a tricky one. The retailer could have the item as dead stock because the customer has changed their mind; and make a loss on it. That also isn’t fair (and is the reason these bespoke exceptions exist). If I ordered a size 16 ski boot (that was prefabricated but not stocked by the retailer regularly) and then cancel it because i decided not to go skiing, then I do think that I should have to mitigate the losses for the retailer. 

But in that case, I would be asking the retailer to order me one in (it’s not a drop down box that can be ordered without contact with the retailer). I do think, generally, if you can order the item ‘at will’ without having to contact anyone in the retailer then it probably doesn’t meet the threshold of ‘bespoke’. 

Why I  don't think boots that weren't made to measure wouldn't be bespoke is  the retailer has options. The retailer doesn't stock that size, the retailer agrees B2B with manufacture that returns are accepted, the retailer takes on the risk.
Just a general "have to order in" wouldn't be enough, as it could be abused far to easily to cut down returns.

RefluentBeans said:

It’s also worth adding (in the OP’s case), for anyone not tech savvy, the new MacBooks are physically impossible to upgrade the memory/CPU/GPU on as it’s all one chip now. This one config isn’t just replacing one component it’s the whole chip that changes - thus it’s not ‘built to order’ as the chips would be fabricated in set SKU’s. 

Thank you for that info.
Do you know if the chips can be reset, so back to a blank canvas?

Chips can’t be reset - certainly not by the user. But at the scale Apple would be making them, it’s not a case of not having enough of them, it’s a case of not having enough of the built units within the operating area (ie Europe vs America vs Asia). 

The lead time on chips are months - that was one of the contributing factors to the spike in prices of cars/computers/TV’s etc in the pandemic - chip fabrication was at max; and there was bidding wars for production so low quality chips (like the ones to operate a car - don’t need much actual processing compared to phones/laptops/PC’s) were priced out, and even big players like Intel and Nvidia couldn’t get stock quickly enough so prices to consumers rose. 

That is to say, there is no way Apple makes a chip on the request of one single order. Unless a customer wants to pay >£10k for a device (*sigh* which I know some people would actually pay for). But it just would also take way too long for an average consumer to want to wait. Then they’d have to actually build the machine - so outside of some minor modifications externally (like a name engraved/serialising the body for businesses to asset track), Apple would just make all of the models in varying quantities based on what they will sell. They know the entry level ones will sell a lot more than the fully specced models so that’s what it’ll be based on. 

I do agree - based on this they aren’t ‘bespoke’ and it should be on retailers to negotiate a returns deal (or buy back) from their suppliers to limit liability. And I guess if they can’t - they need to determine if it’s worth the risk of being left with dead stock. I’d imagine if OP pushes it they will win. 

OP - given you can get Macs from a number of retailers - have you considered that you could feasibly push this all the way to SCC if you wanted? It would be different if there was only a number of stores selling the product but there are many, many, many retailers of Apple products. 

Thanks for this insight. I hadn't considered small claims court, is it worth following a tutorial for this? Im currently awaiting the retailer to respond to my email from yesterday where I stated they're not custom builds but the way you've explained it is even more elegant. 

So the normal process would be to first ensure you’ve exhausted all the internal customer service option. When you feel you have, then you can write a letter before action - which is basically you letting the retailer know you are still unhappy, and intend to take it to court to get a resolution. You should include what you want as a resolution (eg a refund). 

Normally at this stage the company will either fold or they’ll be willing to take it to court (it’s also normally the point where solicitors get involved from the company to advise them if they’ve got a case or if it’s not worth the battle. 

If you do need to file, you can do online and it’s an okay process. 

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/letter/letter-before-small-claims-court-claim-aSFAC8Q6Jqan - this is a pretty good resource to explain the process. 

Companies use commercial lawyers in drafting their terms and conditions of trade at the outset not afterwards. English Law is well established. 

The T&Cs can be totally correct, but if the retailer classes something that is "bespoke" that isn't and the customer complaints  then as RefluentBeans
states they either fold  or gets a solicitor involved.