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

sheramber

The advice seems to be to accept the change of feet.

Penguin_

So they supplied the wrong feet (compared to what you saw in store) & they can change them so they would be what you saw in store?

born_again

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Have you specifically said you are exercising the short term right to reject OP?

This is an interesting issue, our regs make no mention of the issue having to be minor (in fact freedom for minor defects is mentioned under satisfactory quality), however EU guidance states the regs aren’t intended to allow rejection over minor matters. 

Perhaps better off contacting head office and making it clear you are using the short term right and see what they say.

Given this was purchased in store & as such the item is not faulty. Retailer is offering a solution. New feet.
Does the Op have a right to reject?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

born_again said:

Given this was purchased in store & as such the item is not faulty. Retailer is offering a solution. New feet.
Does the Op have a right to reject?

Well within 30 days generally yes, if the goods do not conform you can reject for a full refund, I'm just not sure if there is a line anywhere, for example can you reject a brand new car because of a chip in wall of one of the tyres? 

Phoenix72

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

Lipgloss24

Phoenix72 said:

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

Phoenix72 said:

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

I’m not looking for any reason to reject the sofa I agreed to grey sofa dark feet . They have  give me the feet I didn’t agree to  therefore under the consumer act right 2015 if items are deliverd that are 
* not fit for purpose 
* not as described 
* satisfactory quality 
* last a reasonable length of time  u can reject within 30 days . Simply because the issue is considered minor, does not change this. The consumer rights act does not distinguish between major and minor faults . Dfs have made a error 

eskbanker

Lipgloss24 said:

Phoenix72 said:

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

I’m not looking for any reason to reject the sofa I agreed to grey sofa dark feet . They have  give me the feet I didn’t agree to  therefore under the consumer act right 2015 if items are deliverd that are 
* not fit for purpose 
* not as described 
* satisfactory quality 
* last a reasonable length of time  u can reject within 30 days . Simply because the issue is considered minor, does not change this. The consumer rights act does not distinguish between major and minor faults . Dfs have made a error 

The fact that "The manager then said he has ordered me the parts and they will be here next week" (an entirely reasonable response) reinforces the view that you're seeking to get out of the contract on a technicality, but it is a fact that the CRA wording doesn't differentiate between major and minor faults.

It does seem prudent to consider your next move if they continue to refuse a full refund though - as ever, it's one thing to have legal rights but another to enforce them....

powerful_Rogue

Lipgloss24 said:

Phoenix72 said:

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

Phoenix72 said:

Bearing in mind there is usually a choice of legs then is it an intrinsic compenent. I had a new sofa delivered the other day....no feet when they brought it into house but guy nipped out to van and put on in 2 minutes.

You are looking for any reason to reject as you no longer like the sofa.

I’m not looking for any reason to reject the sofa I agreed to grey sofa dark feet . They have  give me the feet I didn’t agree to  therefore under the consumer act right 2015 if items are deliverd that are 
* not fit for purpose  - In what sense? Sofa feet are sofa feet.
* not as described  - Correct, but it seems due to an error on their part, which they will remedy
* satisfactory quality  - Why are they not of satisfactory quality?
* last a reasonable length of time - What makes you believe they wont?

 u can reject within 30 days . Simply because the issue is considered minor, does not change this. The consumer rights act does not distinguish between major and minor faults . Dfs have made a error 

Exactly, DFS have made an error. I'd save you arguments for the small claims court, as this is where it will end up.

Make sure your argument is correct though, as pointed out by my bold above. You can't just quote parts that don't apply.

Lipgloss24

Penguin_ said:

So they supplied the wrong feet (compared to what you saw in store) & they can change them so they would be what you saw in store?

I didn’t see this colour in store this is what I choose out of the colours he offered yet they sent me two diff colours not what I asked for 

eskbanker

powerful_Rogue said:
Make sure your argument is correct though, as pointed out by my bold above. You can't just quote parts that don't apply.

I was going to say the same thing but then realised that OP presumably means any one of the bullet point list, rather than suggesting that all apply here, i.e. they're linked with 'or' rather than 'and'!