Faulty iPad, just outside the warranty (please help)

MattMattMattUK

Okell said:

Why would the OP's use of his father's card be fraud if his father authorised it?

The father is unable to authorise it, it is not their authorisation to give. The credit agreement is between the lender and the named party. Under that agreement the named party cannot authorise a third party to use the card. Using a credit card that is not issued to you is deemed fraud by the credit card provider.

Okell said:

It might be that the father was in breach of the card provider's T&Cs allowing the card provider to escape any liability they might otherwise have to the cardholder, but where is the fraud in authorising somebody to use your credit card?

The father would have been in breach of the terms and conditions as well, that can result in cards being closed and potentially a CIFAS marker for misuse of facility. The cardholder is just not legally able to authorise someone to use "their" credit card.

Okell said:

(If it is fraud then I committed fraud earlier today - and many many times in the past...)

That is up to you, but it would seem unwise at best.

Techy_girl

Doinfine said:

@Techy_girl - thank you, I do still have the receipt.  I am content that the contract was with me - my late father did not even enter the store, tender the card, choose exactly which iPad was being bought, etc etc.

Excellent!! with receipt, consumer law still applies even if the item was received as a gift

You will indeed need to focus on Argos and cite consumer law, stay focussed on targetting Argos and escalate when you can.  Obviously EDIT the template letter was used in the forum.

Faulty iPad from O2 and Consumer Rights Act 2015 <<<successfully resolved>>>

born_again

Okell said:

Dunno about chargeback as the rules are bonkers ( )

It would have no effect. Except father would have to do the leg work.

Except that in this case there is no chargeback right. As "Faulty" only covers when received, not a problem that happens after purchase.

Okell

MattMattMattUK said:

Okell said:

Why would the OP's use of his father's card be fraud if his father authorised it?

The father is unable to authorise it, it is not their authorisation to give. The credit agreement is between the lender and the named party. Under that agreement the named party cannot authorise a third party to use the card. Using a credit card that is not issued to you is deemed fraud by the credit card provider...

Can you point me to which statute or court decision gives a card provider the power to "deem" that someone is guilty of a criminal offence?  I thought only a court could do that.

Which provision(s) of the Fraud Act has been contravened?

I'm not arguing that the OP's father wasn't in breach of his cards T&Cs, but I don't see hoiw he's committed fraud despite what his card provider thinks

Okell

Techy_girl said:

Doinfine said:

@Techy_girl - thank you, I do still have the receipt.  I am content that the contract was with me - my late father did not even enter the store, tender the card, choose exactly which iPad was being bought, etc etc.

Excellent!! with receipt, consumer law still applies even if the item was received as a gift

Once again I think you are mistaken.  I'm not aware of any consumer law that states that the recipient of a gift can enforce the consumer rights held by the original purchaser - whether they have the purchaser's receipt or not.

Some stores may be happy to refund and replace etc on production of a receipt, but that will be down to their own policies and nothing to do with consumer law.

Techy_girl said:

You will indeed need to focus on Argos and cite consumer law, stay focussed on targetting Argos and escalate when you can.  Obviously EDIT the template letter was used in the forum.

Faulty iPad from O2 and Consumer Rights Act 2015 <<<successfully resolved>>>

That thread had nothing to do with gifts or receipts and the store eventually only acceded to the OP "as a gesture of goodwill".  I'm not sure it's an example to follow.

I do, however, recall that that thread was contaminated with inaccurate advice drafted by ChatGPT. 
 
Seems an odd coincidence...

sheramber

Techy_girl said:

Doinfine said:

@Techy_girl - thank you, I do still have the receipt.  I am content that the contract was with me - my late father did not even enter the store, tender the card, choose exactly which iPad was being bought, etc etc.

Excellent!! with receipt, consumer law still applies even if the item was received as a gift

You will indeed need to focus on Argos and cite consumer law, stay focussed on targetting Argos and escalate when you can.  Obviously EDIT the template letter was used in the forum.

Faulty iPad from O2 and Consumer Rights Act 2015 <<<successfully resolved>>>

Wrong again.

If you read the first post you will find that the OP did not buy from Apple. He bought from Argos.

You are giving wrong information.

born_again

Okell said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Okell said:

Why would the OP's use of his father's card be fraud if his father authorised it?

The father is unable to authorise it, it is not their authorisation to give. The credit agreement is between the lender and the named party. Under that agreement the named party cannot authorise a third party to use the card. Using a credit card that is not issued to you is deemed fraud by the credit card provider...

Can you point me to which statute or court decision gives a card provider the power to "deem" that someone is guilty of a criminal offence?  I thought only a court could do that.

Which provision(s) of the Fraud Act has been contravened?

I'm not arguing that the OP's father wasn't in breach of his cards T&Cs, but I don't see hoiw he's committed fraud despite what his card provider thinks

The only way this would be taken as fraud by bank would be if card holder reported as such. But given this was a chip/pin purchase they would have to go to police & get police to issue a CRN before it would even be looked at. 

Which is all a moot point as it is now over 13 months & as such (FOS timescale) bank does not have to do anything. It would be a purely private matter.

RefluentBeans

OP I think your best bet is to keep on at Argos. As has been said on here, Apple will never admit to poor manufacturing; and Apple the manufacturer and Apple the retail store should be considered largely separate entities; as in the Retail stores have little visual on what happens in production lines and so can’t speak to those sort of issues - a whole unit replacement isn’t going to cut mustard when they haven’t even identified what fault there is, just that it is faulty. 

As for S75 - I think it would be your father who would benefit from this, and I don’t think the credit card company has to extend the protections to you. What would normally be the thing to do is get your father to act on your behalf and just omit that you’re the user of the device (in fact I don’t think you lose S75 protection even if the product is essentially gifted, but the person who paid for the item is the beneficiary of those protections - not the gift recipient - but happy to be corrected). 

As for CRA (or as it has been erroneously stated on here as SoGA) I don’t know what is classed as a consumer for the purpose of the act. It could well be that you are the consumer in this case, but I’ll leave it to people who have read the laws to answer whether there is a distinction between a purchaser (ie the person who paid). However, I’m also sure that claims under the CRA don’t stipulate they have to be paid to the same card they were bought on, and just makes reference to a refund and not specific mechanisms for that refund. To me, I took this to mean a ‘cash’ refund - for example the retailer can’t dictate the terms of the refund or they could just offer a credit note and say they’ve done their job. Equally, if you no longer have said bank account then it shouldn’t be on your to chase the bank account and the retailer, the retailer should just give you a refund to your chosen payment method. But I am happy to be corrected - I’m sure @t@the_lunatic_is_in_my_head will confirm or refine the details, as they have a more in depth knowledge of specific legalisation than I do.

Okell

born_again said:

Okell said:

MattMattMattUK said:

Okell said:

Why would the OP's use of his father's card be fraud if his father authorised it?

The father is unable to authorise it, it is not their authorisation to give. The credit agreement is between the lender and the named party. Under that agreement the named party cannot authorise a third party to use the card. Using a credit card that is not issued to you is deemed fraud by the credit card provider...

Can you point me to which statute or court decision gives a card provider the power to "deem" that someone is guilty of a criminal offence?  I thought only a court could do that.

Which provision(s) of the Fraud Act has been contravened?

I'm not arguing that the OP's father wasn't in breach of his cards T&Cs, but I don't see hoiw he's committed fraud despite what his card provider thinks

The only way this would be taken as fraud by bank would be if card holder reported as such. But given this was a chip/pin purchase they would have to go to police & get police to issue a CRN before it would even be looked at. 

Which is all a moot point as it is now over 13 months & as such (FOS timescale) bank does not have to do anything. It would be a purely private matter.

You don't need to tell me!

Tell @MattMattMattUK!

Aylesbury_Duck

RefluentBeans said:

OP I think your best bet is to keep on at Argos. As has been said on here, Apple will never admit to poor manufacturing; and Apple the manufacturer and Apple the retail store should be considered largely separate entities; as in the Retail stores have little visual on what happens in production lines and so can’t speak to those sort of issues - a whole unit replacement isn’t going to cut mustard when they haven’t even identified what fault there is, just that it is faulty. 

As for S75 - I think it would be your father who would benefit from this, and I don’t think the credit card company has to extend the protections to you. What would normally be the thing to do is get your father to act on your behalf and just omit that you’re the user of the device (in fact I don’t think you lose S75 protection even if the product is essentially gifted, but the person who paid for the item is the beneficiary of those protections - not the gift recipient - but happy to be corrected). 

As for CRA (or as it has been erroneously stated on here as SoGA) I don’t know what is classed as a consumer for the purpose of the act. It could well be that you are the consumer in this case, but I’ll leave it to people who have read the laws to answer whether there is a distinction between a purchaser (ie the person who paid). However, I’m also sure that claims under the CRA don’t stipulate they have to be paid to the same card they were bought on, and just makes reference to a refund and not specific mechanisms for that refund. To me, I took this to mean a ‘cash’ refund - for example the retailer can’t dictate the terms of the refund or they could just offer a credit note and say they’ve done their job. Equally, if you no longer have said bank account then it shouldn’t be on your to chase the bank account and the retailer, the retailer should just give you a refund to your chosen payment method. But I am happy to be corrected - I’m sure @t@the_lunatic_is_in_my_head will confirm or refine the details, as they have a more in depth knowledge of specific legalisation than I do.

OP's father has subsequently died, so the S75 option is redundant, anyway.