Samsung "Gift with Purchase" Promotion

btr2

Thanks @RefluentBeans,

Refund or replacement (I like the headphones when they work).
19th Feb.
The headphones don't appear on any invoice (I guess "gifts with purchase" are not invoiceable?)

The issue is less about the cost, but the fact that a £1000 phone was purchased on the understanding that headphones (in working condition obviously) would be sent as well, so yes, I think you're right.

RefluentBeans

btr2 said:

Thanks @RefluentBeans,

Refund or replacement (I like the headphones when they work).
19th Feb.
The headphones don't appear on any invoice (I guess "gifts with purchase" are not invoiceable?)

The issue is less about the cost, but the fact that a £1000 phone was purchased on the understanding that headphones (in working condition obviously) would be sent as well, so yes, I think you're right.

Then reject the whole order, in my opinion. I don’t think you’re entitled to the cost of the headphones and I think you’ll have a hard time convincing people you do (even though the refund would be less than the refund of the whole order). 

If there’s nothing specifically mentioned in the invoice I think it would likely be considered part of the product, so you should be able to reject under the consumer rights act; but sure others will weigh in. 

My gut does tell me there’s little mileage in just going for the headphones though. Seems a very defensible point of Samsung to be that they didn’t value them at RRP, and rather nil; and so you can have a 100% refund of that plus and extra 20% goodwill, which still equates to nil. If it’s a bundle, you normally can return the whole bundle but it’s often harder to just return one item. 

born_again

[Deleted User] said:

£159 from Samsung or £104 from Amazon.

 through a promotional offer of a free set of Galaxy Buds 2 Pro headphones. 

What does the invoice say?
If it lists a price & then a refund then you have a chance. Free gift. Sorry.

btr2

born_again said:

[Deleted User] said:

£159 from Samsung or £104 from Amazon.

 through a promotional offer of a free set of Galaxy Buds 2 Pro headphones. 

What does the invoice say?
If it lists a price & then a refund then you have a chance. Free gift. Sorry.

No invoice. Free gift agreed. But the gift was an incentive to purchase (a £1000 product, so not a small amount). If I offered you a car, and said I'd throw in a free car, and the free car didn't have an engine, would you be able to demand a refund on the bought car, or the value of the free car, or anything at all? Or is it a case of 'shrug shoulders, these things happen'? I don't feel like the latter can be right, that's why I'm wondering if anyone had any experience of this.

"Free gift. Sorry" sounds like something a con artist/scammer might say. Maybe we're the mugs for allowing it? I'm amazed there is no law on this, but it is starting to look like a loophole in the Consumer Rights Act. Who knows. We'll find out I guess.

visidigi

You just say they refused a refund/replacement.

Have they actually offered to 'repair' them again though? 

HillStreetBlues

I also feel it's part of the contract, the reason you paid a grand for the phone is the earbuds. You can simply state without that you wouldn't have paid that money.
If you claim the £159 that they are selling for, Samsung would have to argue that they aren't worth what they are selling them for.

RefluentBeans

HillStreetBlues said:

I also feel it's part of the contract, the reason you paid a grand for the phone is the earbuds. You can simply state without that you wouldn't have paid that money.
If you claim the £159 that they are selling for, Samsung would have to argue that they aren't worth what they are selling them for.

No they wouldn’t. If the consumer is asking for money, they need to say why they are entitled to that money - it’s not on Samsung to prove how much it’s worth to them. In reality, the headphones cost Samsung what £50 landed cost, if that? 

I really do not see any path where you can isolate the headphones. They’re not on the invoice at all, and so you can’t say how much they’re worth to Samsung. 

This is a legal grey area, with the only (reliable) sources being legal journals used in teaching (and hidden behind pay walls). The OP has a better chance to reject the whole order saying it’s bundled. 

HillStreetBlues

RefluentBeans said:

No they wouldn’t. If the consumer is asking for money, they need to say why they are entitled to that money - it’s not on Samsung to prove how much it’s worth to them. In reality, the headphones cost Samsung what £50 landed cost, if that? 

I really do not see any path where you can isolate the headphones. They’re not on the invoice at all, and so you can’t say how much they’re worth to Samsung. 

This is a legal grey area, with the only (reliable) sources being legal journals used in teaching (and hidden behind pay walls). The OP has a better chance to reject the whole order saying it’s bundled. 

It's not really a grey area, it's breach of contract, as the "free" item as been used to induced the contact.
So it's how the breach is rectified.
I agree with rejecting the whole order, as that would be the simplest.
As the first part, not really understating as a person would claim the £159 the headphones are selling for, as that was  the intensive.  So Samsung would have to then state their figure on what they believe it's worth. If they cost Samsung £50, they would be admitting there is a £109 mark up.

RefluentBeans

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

No they wouldn’t. If the consumer is asking for money, they need to say why they are entitled to that money - it’s not on Samsung to prove how much it’s worth to them. In reality, the headphones cost Samsung what £50 landed cost, if that? 

I really do not see any path where you can isolate the headphones. They’re not on the invoice at all, and so you can’t say how much they’re worth to Samsung. 

This is a legal grey area, with the only (reliable) sources being legal journals used in teaching (and hidden behind pay walls). The OP has a better chance to reject the whole order saying it’s bundled. 

It's not really a grey area, it's breach of contract, as the "free" item as been used to induced the contact.
So it's how the breach is rectified.
I agree with rejecting the whole order, as that would be the simplest.
As the first part, not really understating as a person would claim the £159 the headphones are selling for, as that was  the intensive.  So Samsung would have to then state their figure on what they believe it's worth. If they cost Samsung £50, they would be admitting there is a £109 mark up.

It is a grey area. I don’t disagree that it is a breach of contract, so the contract, the whole contract, can be withdrawn by the consumer. The value of the headphones in the contract is nil. They are a gift. Any refund of just the headphones is going to be that. You can’t claim the headphones at full RRP as the value. The value is whatever the value is stated in the contract - so nil. 

Reject the whole order OP. Going after just headphones is a waste of time, and will likely just get you a 100% refund of nothing, as that is the value of a free gift. 

user1977

They're not a "gift", unless Samsung were dishing them out free without a purchase. The OP has bought a bundle of items, it's legally a nonsense for part of that bundle to be deemed "free" and therefore not have any consumer rights attached to them - any more than Samsung could claim that the headphones were the product being paid for and the phone was "free".

If you "buy one get one free" in a supermarket and have a problem with one item, do you think the supermarket could claim that was the "free" item and ignore you?