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

Lipgloss24

The 3 options they give 
light oak 
dark oak
black . 

GingerTim

RefluentBeans said:

 

Also - because it didn’t get an answer before - are you using the sofa still? I was under the impression once rejected you should refrain from using the sofa - happy to be corrected. 

As someone who learns a lot from this board, this seems to me an important unanswered uestion. Does continuing to use an item not impact on the power to reject? Would the company reduce any refund for usage?

mybestattempt

Lipgloss24 said:

The 3 options they give 
light oak 
dark oak
black . 

I've followed this thread with great interest.

Having looked at sofa feet options on the DFS website my opinion is that the feet in that photograph are all dark oak.

The light oak option on the website is very pale with a yellowish tinge.

I wonder what other posters think?

GingerTim

mybestattempt said:

Lipgloss24 said:

The 3 options they give 
light oak 
dark oak
black . 

I've followed this thread with great interest.

Having looked at sofa feet options on the DFS website my opinion is that the feet in that photograph are all dark oak.

The light oak option on the website is very pale with a yellowish tinge.

I wonder what other posters think (while I attempt to find out how to provide a link to or photograph of the feet options)?

These are the colours according to the DFS website. I'm inclined to agree with you - though the 'dark' one labelled by the OP might be black, hard to tell in the light of the photograph.

As coincidence has it, I have a DFS sofa with light oak feet They look like this in the flesh.

Lipgloss24

GingerTim said:

RefluentBeans said:

 

Also - because it didn’t get an answer before - are you using the sofa still? I was under the impression once rejected you should refrain from using the sofa - happy to be corrected. 

As someone who learns a lot from this board, this seems to me an important unanswered uestion. Does continuing to use an item not impact on the power to reject? Would the company reduce any refund for usage?

I follow the dfs  page on Facebook and off there I think they do charge you a fee for usage . This sofa isn’t in my main room when at one point i was keeping it hence I agreed for someone to change the feet so yes it has been sat on a hand full of times because in the end I accepted not worth the stress even after handful of times it has rippled ( posted pic previous )which should not be happening from that amount of time . There is a lot of people saying the same thing on the page aswel . Lesson learnt no more sofas from dfs 💩 quality even worse customer service 😂

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

mybestattempt said:

I wonder what other posters think?

I would agree the one in OP's hand looks "dark" but the one on the sofa labelled dark looks more black to me. 

There appears to be a colour difference, the letter mentions the legs being a natural material but I'm 99% sure the dark and black legs will have some kind of finish applied to achieve the colour, either that or they are 3 different species of wood.

You can get natural black oak but my understanding is the colour comes from the wood being underwater for years. 

GingerTim said:

As someone who learns a lot from this board, this seems to me an important unanswered uestion. Does continuing to use an item not impact on the power to reject? Would the company reduce any refund for usage?

A deduction for use can only be imposed after 6 months, so you could buy a sofa and reject it after 2 days in which case it would probably look almost brand new but if you and your dogs sit on the sofa for 16 hours a days for 5 months and then have a valid right to reject the fact you've used it more than the average would doesn't permit a deduction.

As back on page 11, I don't see this mentioned in the regs but "there may be some law or tort covering this aspect in general but if any I'm not sure what that would be."

Either way I think it's going to be very hard for any retailer to actually show the customer used the goods after rejection, unless it's something like a car that records use and there was a record of use at the point of rejection or there was some record of condition (say photos) at the point of rejection and the condition varied when returned. 

Okell

Lipgloss24 said:

The 3 options they give 
light oak 
dark oak
black . 

Is that your photo of the feet on your sofa or is that something else?  It looks like two different pieces of furniture to me.

Do you have a link to your sofa on DFS online?

Okell

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

mybestattempt said:

I wonder what other posters think?

I would agree the one in OP's hand looks "dark" but the one on the sofa labelled dark looks more black to me. 

There appears to be a colour difference, the letter mentions the legs being a natural material but I'm 99% sure the dark and black legs will have some kind of finish applied to achieve the colour, either that or they are 3 different species of wood...

I think I agree.

(1)  The foot on the right of the photo posted by the OP looks black to me rather than "dark".

(2)  Those colour variations don't look like a natural finish to me.  Certainly the black one must have been dyed or stained in some way, and i suspect also the dark one?

born_again

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

If the feet are the "wrong" colour how can they be as described and if there's nothing wrong with them why are DFS replacing them? 

Could it be a simple as they are feeling it is good customer service, given it's a small part & something that is often never seen, especially the ones at the back of the sofa?

mybestattempt

As far as I'm aware the issue was 12 dark legs were ordered and the OP said  9 dark and 3 light were delivered.
I can't see she has ever mentioned black.
The variation between dark and light on the website is stark.