Taking Amazon to court

Alderbank

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

I can't get 'Quote to work properly so this is in reply to the 120 day post at the bottom of page 1.

It's over 120 days. in fact it's over 3 years. That's the problem. Both Amazon & Mastercard point blank refuse to do anything over 3 years, however the law states 5 years for Scotland & 6 for England & Wales.

Which law?

If you are referring to the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act then I don't think it works the way you think it does.

The Act says that if Amazon or Mastercard has a defined obligation in one of the categories in Schedule 1 and you believe that they owe you money, you can take them to court to try to recover it, but after the prescription period expires the debt is cancelled so you would be unable to bring an action later (the law is different in England).
Whether it is 1 month after the obligation arose or 59 months makes no difference and 3 years has no relevance. If they don't pay and it's within 5 years you have to go to court. 

born_again

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

I can't get 'Quote to work properly so this is in reply to the 120 day post at the bottom of page 1.

It's over 120 days. in fact it's over 3 years. That's the problem. Both Amazon & Mastercard point blank refuse to do anything over 3 years, however the law states 5 years for Scotland & 6 for England & Wales.

Can we take a step back.
How much were the AirPods?

I take it you have been speaking to card provider & not direct with Mastercard who will only direct you back to your card provider.

A chargeback has to be within 120 days of debit date, & would not cover this case, as they have to be faulty from receipt, not something that develops later.

S75 as long as they cost more than £100. A claim could be possible. Timescale is rule of thumb 6 (UK) or in Scotland 5 years. Have seem cases over, but they have been extreme such as breast implants. In this case it would be in time. But is there a breach of contract or misrepresentation, which is the main basis of S75.

So staff member was wrong with 3 years on that one.🤦‍♀️

Quite funny that one poster slates bank staff & then get's it wrong with the 120 days themselves, as it is not from when you notice the problem 🤷‍♀️

Alderbank

born_again said:

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

I can't get 'Quote to work properly so this is in reply to the 120 day post at the bottom of page 1.

It's over 120 days. in fact it's over 3 years. That's the problem. Both Amazon & Mastercard point blank refuse to do anything over 3 years, however the law states 5 years for Scotland & 6 for England & Wales.

 Timescale is rule of thumb 6 (UK) or in Scotland 5 years.

With respect, Scotland is still (at time of writing) UK. Perhaps you mean E&W?  

DullGreyGuy

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

La531983 - We noticed it recently, over 3 years since buying them. However the law states that if it is a known manufacturing issue, then you area allowed a refund or replacement if you notice the problem within 5 years.

No, as above, it's if it isn't reasonably durable, considering what it is, up to a maximum of 5/6 years. 

After 6 months the items refund can be reduced to reflect use. So if you say your AirPods were £200 (you don't say which model) and its deemed they should last about 4 years then having a fault after 3 years would be a 25%/£50 refund

You cannot force them to replace them if another resolution (repair or refund) is materially cheaper for them

cr1mson

I remember this issue back in 2020 whereby some airpod pros experienced some sound quality issues and Apple did some kind of service programme for those affected which lasted for 3 years after original purchase.

You will need to prove that the defect was present at time of purchase now I would have throught that will be very easy for Amazon to argue that it wasn't as it hasn't presented until now it wasn't present at that time. Those affected by the original issue presented soon after purchase so surely Amazon would just say that this is an entirely separate issue that has developed as product is over 3 years old.

Also as others have mentioned they can make a deduction for use of the product in the past 3 years.

And finally would expect them to ask why you didn't take advantage of the service programme to have them serviced as reasonably well publicised. I don't have airpods and was aware.

Sorry if sounds harsh but sometimes the energy/time required exceeds the likely benefits and best just to move on and spend your energy/time on something else.

Aylesbury_Duck

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

La531983 - We noticed it recently, over 3 years since buying them. However the law states that if it is a known manufacturing issue, then you area allowed a refund or replacement if you notice the problem within 5 years.

Can you provide a link to that precise statement?

DullGreyGuy

cr1mson said:

I remember this issue back in 2020 whereby some airpod pros experienced some sound quality issues and Apple did some kind of service programme for those affected which lasted for 3 years after original purchase.

You will need to prove that the defect was present at time of purchase now I would have throught that will be very easy for Amazon to argue that it wasn't as it hasn't presented until now it wasn't present at that time. Those affected by the original issue presented soon after purchase so surely Amazon would just say that this is an entirely separate issue that has developed as product is over 3 years old.

Also as others have mentioned they can make a deduction for use of the product in the past 3 years.

And finally would expect them to ask why you didn't take advantage of the service programme to have them serviced as reasonably well publicised. I don't have airpods and was aware.

Sorry if sounds harsh but sometimes the energy/time required exceeds the likely benefits and best just to move on and spend your energy/time on something else.

You mean this one https://support.apple.com/en-gb/airpods-pro-service-program-sound-issues 

born_again

Alderbank said:

born_again said:

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

I can't get 'Quote to work properly so this is in reply to the 120 day post at the bottom of page 1.

It's over 120 days. in fact it's over 3 years. That's the problem. Both Amazon & Mastercard point blank refuse to do anything over 3 years, however the law states 5 years for Scotland & 6 for England & Wales.

 Timescale is rule of thumb 6 (UK) or in Scotland 5 years.

With respect, Scotland is still (at time of writing) UK. Perhaps you mean E&W?  

In reality it should be the same for all, but Scotland seem to make their own laws/rules in certain cases.

BTW you missed NI 🤦‍♀️

pallyman

You may also lose your Amazon account if you have one.

DullGreyGuy

born_again said:

Alderbank said:

born_again said:

TomB_on_the_Sax said:

I can't get 'Quote to work properly so this is in reply to the 120 day post at the bottom of page 1.

It's over 120 days. in fact it's over 3 years. That's the problem. Both Amazon & Mastercard point blank refuse to do anything over 3 years, however the law states 5 years for Scotland & 6 for England & Wales.

 Timescale is rule of thumb 6 (UK) or in Scotland 5 years.

With respect, Scotland is still (at time of writing) UK. Perhaps you mean E&W?  

In reality it should be the same for all, but Scotland seem to make their own laws/rules in certain cases.

BTW you missed NI 🤦‍♀️

No, NI is also separate from E&W and Scotland...

E&W - Limitations Act 1980 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58
Scotland - Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/52 
NI - Limitation (Northern Ireland) Order 1987 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/nisi/1989/1339 

Coincidently the NI law is also 6 years for a simple contract but there are differences elsewhere than the E&W law