DFS .. trying to get a refund over sending me the wrong colour feet

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

PHK said:

Despite V12 not seemingly understanding the difference between furniture ombudsman and financial ombudsman

I think you've misunderstood what they said  

They understand the difference perfectly but instead of saying we are responsible under S75 and if you aren't happy with our response you may go to the financial ombudsman they are saying talk to DFS, talk to the furniture ombudsman, but go away and leave us alone.

PHK said:

 But the FOS is a free service so not using the FOS will mean the OP hasn’t mitigated their loss so might well not get the court fees if they win. 

The furniture ombudsman is presumably a free service as well, to what extent is someone expected to go to to mitigate their losses? There is also a counter argument, in my mind at least (that doesn't necessarily mean anything!), that the legislation is extremely clear, one failed repair meaning final right to reject, there is no ambiguity whatsoever, it is DFS and V12 who are wasting the court's time.  

From reading on here it's been said the financial ombudsman doesn't necessarily rule on the legal aspect but rather whether the customer has been treated fairly. 

Neither are areas I know in detail but I do think V12 would be mad to let this go to small claims, it would cost them more than sofa on a case that is clear cut, I think OP needs to push V12 who will ultimately fold. 

Okell said:

@the_lunatic_is_in_my_head: 

Just to add - having reviewed today's posts - I think if I were the OP I'd first contact DFS immediately and tell them that as their single attempt to repair permitted by the CRA has failed dismally, then I'm exercising my final right to reject the sofa for a full refund to be paid within 14* days.  Quoting s24(5)(a)  Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk)

(And the OP needs to be emphasising that he is not asking to exercise this right, he IS exercising it with or without their agreememnt)

I'd be amazed if DFS have the gall and brassneck to try to argue they should have another attempt at rectifying this

Yes I agree no harm in contacting DFS and saying the repair failed, final right to reject, refund due but I think they will have the brassneck to push back.

These companies push it as far as possible in the hope the customer just gives up for an easy life. 

born_again said:

The point of S75 is in negates the need (or should do) to go to court. As if finance co refuse, then you have the option of going to FOS (no cost to consumer)

TBH. This is a case where going back to store on a busy day & making the point that this is now a farce as they can not get a simple task of getting the right colour feet supplied.
Rejecting & returning is going to mean no sofa for as long as it takes to get a new one. So is something to factor into this whole farce.

Thanks born_again

Lipgloss24

This is the response I have got from sending the the final right to reject email. They ain’t giving in are they . It’s like bashing my head against a brick wall with them 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

PHK

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

PHK said:

Despite V12 not seemingly understanding the difference between furniture ombudsman and financial ombudsman

I think you've misunderstood what they said  

They understand the difference perfectly but instead of saying we are responsible under S75 and if you aren't happy with our response you may go to the financial ombudsman they are saying talk to DFS, talk to the furniture ombudsman, but go away and leave us alone.

PHK said:

 But the FOS is a free service so not using the FOS will mean the OP hasn’t mitigated their loss so might well not get the court fees if they win. 

The furniture ombudsman is presumably a free service as well, to what extent is someone expected to go to to mitigate their losses? There is also a counter argument, in my mind at least (that doesn't necessarily mean anything!), that the legislation is extremely clear, one failed repair meaning final right to reject, there is no ambiguity whatsoever, it is DFS and V12 who are wasting the court's time.  

From reading on here it's been said the financial ombudsman doesn't necessarily rule on the legal aspect but rather whether the customer has been treated fairly. 

Neither are areas I know in detail but I do think V12 would be mad to let this go to small claims, it would cost them more than sofa on a case that is clear cut, I think OP needs to push V12 who will ultimately fold. 

Okell said:

@the_lunatic_is_in_my_head: 

Just to add - having reviewed today's posts - I think if I were the OP I'd first contact DFS immediately and tell them that as their single attempt to repair permitted by the CRA has failed dismally, then I'm exercising my final right to reject the sofa for a full refund to be paid within 14* days.  Quoting s24(5)(a)  Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk)

(And the OP needs to be emphasising that he is not asking to exercise this right, he IS exercising it with or without their agreememnt)

I'd be amazed if DFS have the gall and brassneck to try to argue they should have another attempt at rectifying this

Yes I agree no harm in contacting DFS and saying the repair failed, final right to reject, refund due but I think they will have the brassneck to push back.

These companies push it as far as possible in the hope the customer just gives up for an easy life. 

born_again said:

The point of S75 is in negates the need (or should do) to go to court. As if finance co refuse, then you have the option of going to FOS (no cost to consumer)

TBH. This is a case where going back to store on a busy day & making the point that this is now a farce as they can not get a simple task of getting the right colour feet supplied.
Rejecting & returning is going to mean no sofa for as long as it takes to get a new one. So is something to factor into this whole farce.

Thanks born_again

The FOS is quite clear about what the potential consequences are on legal action of using their service and vice-versa. It’s even in their consumer leaflet. 

Lipgloss24

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

dfs store manager , I haven’t heard back off v12 yet 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Lipgloss24 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

dfs store manager , I haven’t heard back off v12 yet 

Not surprised from DFS, best to see what V12 come back with.  

PHK said:

The FOS is quite clear about what the potential consequences are on legal action of using their service and vice-versa. It’s even in their consumer leaflet. 

Do you have a link?

This says:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/resolving-complaint/ordering-leaflet/leaflet

Our service isn’t right for all situations. Depending on what’s happened, it might be better for you to go to court. For example, you might want to go to court if you think the loss you’ve suffered is more than we can tell a business to pay you.

We won’t usually look into a problem that a court has already looked into. And if you accept our ombudsman’s final decision, a court won’t look into the same issues.

If you don’t accept the ombudsman’s final decision, you can still take your problem to court. Because the courts take a different approach, their answer might be different to ours.

The FOS may well be viable but you'd hope V12 would want to avoid both court and a FOS complaint as both would be costly, currently V12 are telling the OP DFS said this, DFS said that, hopefully OP can get a reply from someone at V12 who understands their obligations or gives a valid reason the right to reject doesn't exist (although with a failed repair attempt I don't see what that could be but every day is a school day). 

Lipgloss24

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

This is v12 response to the email 🙃

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Lipgloss24 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

This is v12 response to the email 🙃

Well it's a bit of progress OP.

I would be tempted to write back with the below to give them a nudge to crack on with it. 



Dear V12 

Thank you for your reply and acknowledging my right to reject the sofa due it not conforming to the contract. 

I appreciate you wish to limit your liability under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act by discussing the matter with DFS and I have no issue with this however I would like reiterate the timeframe for providing a refund as per paragraph (15) of Section 20 of the Consumer Rights.

In my previous communication I had requested the correct address to correspond with V12 via post for the purposes of complying with the pre-action protocols, with this development hopefully such actions won't be required but I request this address be provided now to prevent further delay in the event the matter isn't resolved within the required timeframe. 

Thank you in advance,
Sincerely

Lipgloss24

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Lipgloss24 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Is that from V12 or DFS OP?

This is v12 response to the email 🙃

Well it's a bit of progress OP.

I would be tempted to write back with the below to give them a nudge to crack on with it. 



Dear V12 

Thank you for your reply and acknowledging my right to reject the sofa due it not conforming to the contract. 

I appreciate you wish to limit your liability under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act by discussing the matter with DFS and I have no issue with this however I would like reiterate the timeframe for providing a refund as per paragraph (15) of Section 20 of the Consumer Rights.

In my previous communication I had requested the correct address to correspond with V12 via post for the purposes of complying with the pre-action protocols, with this development hopefully such actions won't be required but I request this address be provided now to prevent further delay in the event the matter isn't resolved within the required timeframe. 

Thank you in advance,
Sincerely

They have provided me with the addresss 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Lipgloss24 said:

They have provided me with the addresss 

Apologies I thought they had just ignored that bit.

In that case I'd be generous and give them 14 days from the date of the email above where they have acknowledged the right to reject.

If they don't reply by then you can send the letter before action which might spur them on or simply send a message asking for an update. 

Hopefully they've realised you aren't going to be fobbed off and are aware of your rights so will get this sorted out now. 

Keep us updated if you get a result or need any more help