Expensive Jacket from Outlet Store - Faulty

sheramber

Ectophile said:

sheramber said:

Have you caught a thread on something like a bracelet or a watch?

It seems extreme to want a refund , rather than an exchange, for a jacket that you wanted.

If you can't sew it yourself than often dry cleaners offer a repair service. 

OP has a legal right to reject faulty goods within 30 days.  I don't see how exercising those rights can be considered "extreme", and OP has no reason to get the goods fixed at their own expense.

I never said she didn't.

screech_78

The terms & conditions of their refund policy are for change of mind returns. 

Of course, they may argue that you’ve caused the damage but remain polite and hopefully it’ll be fine. 

Wongus

Thanks to everyone for the useful responses, as an update, customer services has responded to offer a collection and repair. 

I have replied in no uncertain terms, that I would like a full refund, on the basis that I am exercising my right under the CRA to reject a faulty product within 30 days of purchase. 

Will keep you all updated. 

As a contingency, any thoughts on a Section 75 claim to my credit card provider if customer services don't play ball? 

Wongus

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

born_again

Wongus said:

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

Wait & see what they come back with. 

screech_78

Wongus said:

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

I think you’ve jumped the gun a bit there. 

If relying on the short time right to reject, the onus is on you to prove a fault. So in reality, you need to at least let the retailer inspect it first to confirm a fault. Have you done this? 

Wongus

screech_78 said:

Wongus said:

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

I think you’ve jumped the gun a bit there. 

If relying on the short time right to reject, the onus is on you to prove a fault. So in reality, you need to at least let the retailer inspect it first to confirm a fault. Have you done this? 

They've asked me to get in touch directly with the Outlet Store now, as the central customer services are not able to issue a refund directly.

I did email the store about the faulty jacket and damage previously, but didn't receive a response, I have now forwarded on the email to the store, so let's see if they respond. 

I've sent in photos of the jacket/damage, neither the store/customer services asked to review the jacket, I would be happy for them to do so if they wanted. Also isn't the onus on them to prove the jacket was not at fault if within the first 30 days?

This is from the MSE website

"What proof do you need?

When goods are faulty, if you return them within six months, then it's up to the shop to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After this, the burden of proof shifts and it's up to you to prove they were faulty when you bought them."

born_again

You should be taking it back to store you bought it from.

powerful_Rogue

Wongus said:

screech_78 said:

Wongus said:

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

I think you’ve jumped the gun a bit there. 

If relying on the short time right to reject, the onus is on you to prove a fault. So in reality, you need to at least let the retailer inspect it first to confirm a fault. Have you done this? 

They've asked me to get in touch directly with the Outlet Store now, as the central customer services are not able to issue a refund directly.

I did email the store about the faulty jacket and damage previously, but didn't receive a response, I have now forwarded on the email to the store, so let's see if they respond. 

I've sent in photos of the jacket/damage, neither the store/customer services asked to review the jacket, I would be happy for them to do so if they wanted. Also isn't the onus on them to prove the jacket was not at fault if within the first 30 days?

This is from the MSE website

"What proof do you need?

When goods are faulty, if you return them within six months, then it's up to the shop to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After this, the burden of proof shifts and it's up to you to prove they were faulty when you bought them."

Nope. First 30 days the onus is on the purchaser. 31 days - six months burden is on the retailer.

Wongus

powerful_Rogue said:

Wongus said:

screech_78 said:

Wongus said:

They have now replied and after a thorough investigation, they are not in a position to issue a refund right now. No further details have been provided. 

I responded with a pre court letter, re-iterating my claim under the CRA 2015, asking for specific details why they refused to refund and offering to use ADR.

Would it make any sense at all to pursue a Section 75 claim through my credit card provider before filing a court claim?

I think you’ve jumped the gun a bit there. 

If relying on the short time right to reject, the onus is on you to prove a fault. So in reality, you need to at least let the retailer inspect it first to confirm a fault. Have you done this? 

They've asked me to get in touch directly with the Outlet Store now, as the central customer services are not able to issue a refund directly.

I did email the store about the faulty jacket and damage previously, but didn't receive a response, I have now forwarded on the email to the store, so let's see if they respond. 

I've sent in photos of the jacket/damage, neither the store/customer services asked to review the jacket, I would be happy for them to do so if they wanted. Also isn't the onus on them to prove the jacket was not at fault if within the first 30 days?

This is from the MSE website

"What proof do you need?

When goods are faulty, if you return them within six months, then it's up to the shop to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After this, the burden of proof shifts and it's up to you to prove they were faulty when you bought them."

Nope. First 30 days the onus is on the purchaser. 31 days - six months burden is on the retailer.

Nope, according to the Consumer Rights Act 2015, if a product is found to be faulty within the first 30 days after purchase, the consumer has the right to reject the product and receive a full refund. During this initial 30-day period, the burden of proof is generally on the seller to demonstrate that the product was not faulty at the time of purchase.

This is outlined in Part 1, Chapter 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, particularly sections 19-24, which cover the consumer's rights to reject faulty goods and receive a refund, repair, or replacement.

Also based on what you said, the burden of proof would shift from purchaser to retailer back to purchaser?! A bit too musical chairs?