Argos won't Pick-Up/Refund my faulty item

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Kim_13

On the other hand, shouldn't the retailer be pleased that a customer has taken the time to try to fix the issue themselves rather than immediately reporting a faulty item. A certain percentage of cases must be user error rather than faulty goods having been supplied.

The problem is that the 30 days to reject the faulty goods appear to have now passed, due to Argos succeeding in fobbing the OP off for 23 days after the issue was reported to them (and now denying that it was reported in the time allowed by legislation.)

Do you have evidence of your attempts to contact them, and their broken promises to collect the laptop? Emails etc?

RefluentBeans

Kim_13 said:

On the other hand, shouldn't the retailer be pleased that a customer has taken the time to try to fix the issue themselves rather than immediately reporting a faulty item. A certain percentage of cases must be user error rather than faulty goods having been supplied.

The problem is that the 30 days to reject the faulty goods appear to have now passed, due to Argos succeeding in fobbing the OP off for 23 days after the issue was reported to them (and now denying that it was reported in the time allowed by legislation.)

Do you have evidence of your attempts to contact them, and their broken promises to collect the laptop? Emails etc?

If it’s user error, fairly sure the retailer would reject the claim as it’s not faulty. Can’t imagine many retailers would be willing to accept a return and issue a refund before at least validating the issue first. 

It also really depends on the language used by the OP. I would think the phrase ‘I want to return my faulty item within 30 days’ would be enough for a court to think the customer has attempted to exercise their short term right to reject; just because they don’t quote the legalisation by name doesn’t mean the retailer has the right to restrict their rights. After all, ‘consumer rights act’ isn’t actually a magic phrase that suddenly awakens the retailer to the law. Argos is big enough to know the law, and by refusing to refund an item they know has been alleged to be faulty within 30 days is attempting to limit someone’s rights. 

Kim_13

RefluentBeans said:

Kim_13 said:

On the other hand, shouldn't the retailer be pleased that a customer has taken the time to try to fix the issue themselves rather than immediately reporting a faulty item. A certain percentage of cases must be user error rather than faulty goods having been supplied.

The problem is that the 30 days to reject the faulty goods appear to have now passed, due to Argos succeeding in fobbing the OP off for 23 days after the issue was reported to them (and now denying that it was reported in the time allowed by legislation.)

Do you have evidence of your attempts to contact them, and their broken promises to collect the laptop? Emails etc?

If it’s user error, fairly sure the retailer would reject the claim as it’s not faulty. Can’t imagine many retailers would be willing to accept a return and issue a refund before at least validating the issue first. 

Of course, I was referring to the argument that the OP had waited 7 days before reporting that the product was faulty. Attempting to fix it using the kinds of things a reasonable person would expect rather than immediately reporting it would be a counter argument to you waited 7 days before reporting it and could have dropped it in that time.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

RefluentBeans

powerful_Rogue said:

Kim_13 said:

RefluentBeans said:

Kim_13 said:

On the other hand, shouldn't the retailer be pleased that a customer has taken the time to try to fix the issue themselves rather than immediately reporting a faulty item. A certain percentage of cases must be user error rather than faulty goods having been supplied.

The problem is that the 30 days to reject the faulty goods appear to have now passed, due to Argos succeeding in fobbing the OP off for 23 days after the issue was reported to them (and now denying that it was reported in the time allowed by legislation.)

Do you have evidence of your attempts to contact them, and their broken promises to collect the laptop? Emails etc?

If it’s user error, fairly sure the retailer would reject the claim as it’s not faulty. Can’t imagine many retailers would be willing to accept a return and issue a refund before at least validating the issue first. 

Of course, I was referring to the argument that the OP had waited 7 days before reporting that the product was faulty. Attempting to fix it using the kinds of things a reasonable person would expect rather than immediately reporting it would be a counter argument to you waited 7 days before reporting it and could have dropped it in that time.

That's a long time to download a driver.

Still doesn’t impact the consumer rights of the situation. Argos has to prove the product wasn’t faulty when they delivered it - the reverse burden. Saying they should’ve reported it earlier doesn’t change that or really prove all that much.

If the OP isn’t technically savvy and was trying to rule out software issues I could see it taking a week.

Reporting a faulty issue within a week is still pretty quick.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

RefluentBeans said: Argos has to prove the product wasn’t faulty when they delivered it - the reverse burden. Saying they should’ve reported it earlier doesn’t change that or really prove all that much.

RefluentBeans said:

It also really depends on the language used by the OP. I would think the phrase ‘I want to return my faulty item within 30 days’ would be enough for a court to think the customer has attempted to exercise their short term right to reject; just because they don’t quote the legalisation by name doesn’t mean the retailer has the right to restrict their rights. After all, ‘consumer rights act’ isn’t actually a magic phrase that suddenly awakens the retailer to the law. Argos is big enough to know the law, and by refusing to refund an item they know has been alleged to be faulty within 30 days is attempting to limit someone’s rights. 

 @RefluentBeans It's important to note reverse burden of proof doesn't apply to the short term right to reject.

The standard position is the person making the claim has to prove their case, the CRA affords this reverse burden but only for repair/replace and final reject/price reduction.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19

(3)If the goods do not conform to the contract because of a breach of any of the terms described in sections 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14, or if they do not conform to the contract under section 16, the consumer's rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—
(a)the short-term right to reject (sections 20 and 22);
(b)the right to repair or replacement (section 23); and
(c)the right to a price reduction or the final right to reject (sections 20 and 24).

(4)If the goods do not conform to the contract under section 15 or because of a breach of requirements that are stated in the contract, the consumer's rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—
(a)the right to repair or replacement (section 23); and
(b)the right to a price reduction or the final right to reject (sections 20 and 24).
(14)For the purposes of subsections (3)(b) and (c) and (4), goods which do not conform to the contract at any time within the period of six months beginning with the day on which the goods were delivered to the consumer must be taken not to have conformed to it on that day.

3(a) is not covered by paragraph 14, it's been said a few times recently reverse burden applies to the short term right but sadly it doesn't. For anything complicated where the retailer is insisting upon proof under the short term right someone is probably better off seeking a repair/replacement.