Faulty iPad, just outside the warranty (please help)

born_again

eskbanker said:

Bradden said:

RefluentBeans said:

It’s also worth noting that the retailer can reduce the amount of money for a refund (if that is what you are seeking) for the use of the product; and the retailer can offer you a repair or replacement at their discretion. If the product fails again, you can exercise your final right to reject, but you’re not at that point yet.  

Could the retailer not argue that there are no consumer rights as the OP did not purchase the item but was gifted it?

Even if the retailer was aware that it wasn't the purchaser's own credit card used, I asked earlier in the thread if anyone knows of any provision within CRA that would allow them to assert that the actual purchaser (OP) has no consumer rights because the purchase was funded with someone else's credit card, but nobody has supported such an argument?

No idea on that. Guess that it is one of many scenarios that when consumer rights were set up, they did not gave much thought to.
But as the Card holder is no longer with us, any refund would go to their card. Yes refunds can go to a closed card. As such how OP would get that is going to be very hard. 

eskbanker

born_again said:

eskbanker said:

Bradden said:

RefluentBeans said:

It’s also worth noting that the retailer can reduce the amount of money for a refund (if that is what you are seeking) for the use of the product; and the retailer can offer you a repair or replacement at their discretion. If the product fails again, you can exercise your final right to reject, but you’re not at that point yet.  

Could the retailer not argue that there are no consumer rights as the OP did not purchase the item but was gifted it?

Even if the retailer was aware that it wasn't the purchaser's own credit card used, I asked earlier in the thread if anyone knows of any provision within CRA that would allow them to assert that the actual purchaser (OP) has no consumer rights because the purchase was funded with someone else's credit card, but nobody has supported such an argument?

No idea on that. Guess that it is one of many scenarios that when consumer rights were set up, they did not gave much thought to.
But as the Card holder is no longer with us, any refund would go to their card. Yes refunds can go to a closed card. As such how OP would get that is going to be very hard. 

Yes, although there are at least two separate issues at play here:

1. Are OP's consumer rights eliminated by virtue of paying with someone else's card?
2. Are there likely to be issues if the resolution of the dispute involves an attempted refund to that card?

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I see these as 'no' and 'possibly' respectively....

born_again

On 2
As I said previously. I'm pretty certain that OP has no right via bank, as they are not card holder & the account is now closed due to the sad death of the card holder.

On 1. I have no idea, guess that would have to go legal to see if a judge would give a opinion on the matter.
It certainly is a interesting point.

Personal thought, is OP bought product (who's card/account actually paid is a distraction in reality) so should be covered.

Okell

Bradden said:

RefluentBeans said:

It’s also worth noting that the retailer can reduce the amount of money for a refund (if that is what you are seeking) for the use of the product; and the retailer can offer you a repair or replacement at their discretion. If the product fails again, you can exercise your final right to reject, but you’re not at that point yet.  

Could the retailer not argue that there are no consumer rights as the OP did not purchase the item but was gifted it?

I think it's unclear.

My view would be that the OP is the consumer for the purposes of the CRA.  His father - the cardholder - was AIUI not present during the purchase and played no part in it at all other than permitting the OP to use his (the father's) credit card for the purchase.

As I posted previously, I don't think that the source of purchase funds is at all relevant in deciding who is the "consumer" with respect to a particular purchase.  I think what's important is who is involved in carrying out the transaction.  If the OP's father had given him a couple of grand in cash and the OP had bought something with that money, I don't think there'd be any question that the OP was the "consumer".  My view is that by giving the OP his credit card the father was doing nothing different from giving him some cash to buy what he wanted.

If the OP's father had bought it himself and given it to his son as a gift, I think that would be different.  I think...

Lot of "I thinks"

eskbanker

born_again said:

On 2
As I said previously. I'm pretty certain that OP has no right via bank, as they are not card holder & the account is now closed due to the sad death of the card holder.

OK, but that's a third separate issue as far as I'm concerned!  I agree that neither chargeback nor s75 applies here (timebarred and DCS chain broken, respectively), but think we'd moved on from that....

Doinfine

*** The ending ***

Thank You to everyone that was kind enough to reply.

Argos customer services were excellent and just said they would refund the money in full to my bank account - no issue over which card was used and ultimately they just accepted it.

Its funny really - I anticipated numerous problems that didn't arise and I do appreciate that my circumstance 'sounds odd' - buying on my late fathers credit card.  

So ... all is sorted.

Thank You again

ForumUser7

Doinfine said:

*** The ending ***

Thank You to everyone that was kind enough to reply.

Argos customer services were excellent and just said they would refund the money in full to my bank account - no issue over which card was used and ultimately they just accepted it.

Its funny really - I anticipated numerous problems that didn't arise and I do appreciate that my circumstance 'sounds odd' - buying on my late fathers credit card.  

So ... all is sorted.

Thank You again

Glad it got sorted! Did they require an independent report in the end please? Can't remember if you'd mentioned it before

Okell

Well done.

Nobody falsely accused you of fraud then...