Successful warranty claim - refund refused - where do I stand?

Jamie1012

My wife bought me a pair of boots which are advertised as Goretex, waterproof boots. They leaked right away but I had a lot on, and I emailed the company more than 30 days after purchase. Due to delays at their end and slow chasing by me, I did not get the boots back to them for a warranty check until after 6 months, although the claim was raised within 6 months.

They are claiming that they cannot replace the boots, as they don't do that model any more (they do, but they're claiming it's a new, more expensive model that I would need to pay the difference for), and they will not issue a refund, only a credit note, as it has been more than six months since purchase.

My understanding of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund, none of which they are offering. I put this to the manager and he said there was no way that a refund will be issued and that "the 6 month limit" is a standard industry rule. It says nothing of the sort on their website T&Cs. He said that I would have to take it to a small claims court if I didn't want the credit note.

Do I have a right to a refund, even though the boots were returned more than 6 months after purchase, and did the manager lie about this standard 6 month limit?

Thanks,

Jamie

powerful_Rogue

Jamie1012 said:

My wife bought me a pair of boots which are advertised as Goretex, waterproof boots. They leaked right away but I had a lot on, and I emailed the company more than 30 days after purchase. Due to delays at their end and slow chasing by me, I did not get the boots back to them for a warranty check until after 6 months, although the claim was raised within 6 months.

They are claiming that they cannot replace the boots, as they don't do that model any more (they do, but they're claiming it's a new, more expensive model that I would need to pay the difference for), and they will not issue a refund, only a credit note, as it has been more than six months since purchase.

My understanding of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund, none of which they are offering. I put this to the manager and he said there was no way that a refund will be issued and that "the 6 month limit" is a standard industry rule. It says nothing of the sort on their website T&Cs. He said that I would have to take it to a small claims court if I didn't want the credit note.

Do I have a right to a refund, even though the boots were returned more than 6 months after purchase, and did the manager lie about this standard 6 month limit?

Thanks,

Jamie

You mention warranty in your title but Cosumer Rights in your post. What have you said to the company as both are two different things.

The Consumer Rights are between your wife and the company as she is the one that purchased the boots. How did she pay for them?

You say ' I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund' That's not totally true, as you are limited by the statue of limitations act which is six years. However none of that applies to your situation and you notified them within six months. What is the actual time line of purchase, fault finding, emailing etc

Jamie1012

powerful_Rogue said:

Jamie1012 said:

My wife bought me a pair of boots which are advertised as Goretex, waterproof boots. They leaked right away but I had a lot on, and I emailed the company more than 30 days after purchase. Due to delays at their end and slow chasing by me, I did not get the boots back to them for a warranty check until after 6 months, although the claim was raised within 6 months.

They are claiming that they cannot replace the boots, as they don't do that model any more (they do, but they're claiming it's a new, more expensive model that I would need to pay the difference for), and they will not issue a refund, only a credit note, as it has been more than six months since purchase.

My understanding of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund, none of which they are offering. I put this to the manager and he said there was no way that a refund will be issued and that "the 6 month limit" is a standard industry rule. It says nothing of the sort on their website T&Cs. He said that I would have to take it to a small claims court if I didn't want the credit note.

Do I have a right to a refund, even though the boots were returned more than 6 months after purchase, and did the manager lie about this standard 6 month limit?

Thanks,

Jamie

You mention warranty in your title but Cosumer Rights in your post. What have you said to the company as both are two different things.

The Consumer Rights are between your wife and the company as she is the one that purchased the boots. How did she pay for them?

You say ' I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund' That's not totally true, as you are limited by the statue of limitations act which is six years. However none of that applies to your situation and you notified them within six months. What is the actual time line of purchase, fault finding, emailing etc

I have been handling the claim, but they are aware that my wife purchased them, and that the request is for a refund to my wife's card.

The boots were bought in October 2023. They were informed that they were faulty in November. By April they had finally responded to my request for a replacement, asking for me to send the boots for a quality check, and they confirmed receipt on April 29th, which was more than 6 months after purchase. One June 1st they confirmed that they had accepted the boots under warranty, but could not offer a replacement, only an alternative or gift card. I have no need of a gift card and they have no suitable alternatives (I'm vegan and their other waterproof boots are leather), so I requested a refund, which they then refused.

The boots are still under warranty now, so I assume that my wife still has the right under the CRA to a repair, replacement or refund, regardless of this 6 months stuff?

Undervalued

Jamie1012 said:

My wife bought me a pair of boots which are advertised as Goretex, waterproof boots. They leaked right away but I had a lot on, and I emailed the company more than 30 days after purchase. Due to delays at their end and slow chasing by me, I did not get the boots back to them for a warranty check until after 6 months, although the claim was raised within 6 months.

They are claiming that they cannot replace the boots, as they don't do that model any more (they do, but they're claiming it's a new, more expensive model that I would need to pay the difference for), and they will not issue a refund, only a credit note, as it has been more than six months since purchase.

My understanding of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund, none of which they are offering. I put this to the manager and he said there was no way that a refund will be issued and that "the 6 month limit" is a standard industry rule. It says nothing of the sort on their website T&Cs. He said that I would have to take it to a small claims court if I didn't want the credit note.

Do I have a right to a refund, even though the boots were returned more than 6 months after purchase, and did the manager lie about this standard 6 month limit?

Thanks,

Jamie

The title of your thread says "Successful warranty claim"?

Exercising your statutory rights is different to claiming under any warranty that might be included.

A warranty cannot restrict your statutory rights but otherwise it can have almost any terms and conditions it likes. That could, for example, only offer a credit note and not a refund.

Given that it is more than six months before they saw the problem, under your statutory rights the onus would be on you to show that the fault was inherent. Normally this needs an independent report from a suitably qualified or experienced person.

You have not helped your position by "slow chasing by me".  There may still be a case to be argued but is it worth the time and the risk given the offer on the table?

Jamie1012

Undervalued said:

Jamie1012 said:

My wife bought me a pair of boots which are advertised as Goretex, waterproof boots. They leaked right away but I had a lot on, and I emailed the company more than 30 days after purchase. Due to delays at their end and slow chasing by me, I did not get the boots back to them for a warranty check until after 6 months, although the claim was raised within 6 months.

They are claiming that they cannot replace the boots, as they don't do that model any more (they do, but they're claiming it's a new, more expensive model that I would need to pay the difference for), and they will not issue a refund, only a credit note, as it has been more than six months since purchase.

My understanding of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that I have an absolute, non-time limited right to either repair, replacement or refund, none of which they are offering. I put this to the manager and he said there was no way that a refund will be issued and that "the 6 month limit" is a standard industry rule. It says nothing of the sort on their website T&Cs. He said that I would have to take it to a small claims court if I didn't want the credit note.

Do I have a right to a refund, even though the boots were returned more than 6 months after purchase, and did the manager lie about this standard 6 month limit?

Thanks,

Jamie

The title of your thread says "Successful warranty claim"?

Exercising your statutory rights is different to claiming under any warranty that might be included.

A warranty cannot restrict your statutory rights but otherwise it can have almost any terms and conditions it likes. That could, for example, only offer a credit note and not a refund.

Given that it is more than six months before they saw the problem, under your statutory rights the onus would be on you to show that the fault was inherent. Normally this needs an independent report from a suitably qualified or experienced person.

You have not helped your position by "slow chasing by me".  There may still be a case to be argued but is it worth the time and the risk given the offer on the table?

But what is the relevance of this six months issue, which places the onus on me? They have accepted the fault is inherent. They haven't disputed that the boots were faulty, nor that I informed them that they were faulty after one month, not six.

This six month limit isn't stated anywhere in their T&Cs. Is it a legitimate protection for the seller? As far as I can tell, it's just something they're saying now, unless it is indeed a standard policy across  the industry which they are not obliged to inform the customer.

If I understand your point about the separation between the warranty and the statutory rights, does my wife not still have a statutory right to repair, replacement or refund, given that the seller has accepted that the product is faulty, in writing?

sheramber

Who did she buy from?  From a retailer or a direct from the manufacturer?

Warranty is from the manufacturer  but your wife's Consumer Rights is with the retailer that she bought them from.

Jamie1012

sheramber said:

Who did she buy from?  From a retailer or a direct from the manufacturer?

Warranty is from the manufacturer  but your wife's Consumer Rights is with the retailer that she bought them from.

She bought from a retailer. When I realised I had missed the standard returns window, I contacted the manufacturer directly, and they advised me to speak to the retailer, as it wasn't bought direct from the manufacturer.

I would have thought in this case, where the retailer doesn't want to replace or refund, they would send the boots to the manufacturer to repair at the manufacturer's expense, but admittedly I have no idea how this stuff works.

Okell

@Jamie1012 -  you are unnecessarily muddying the water by conflating your wife's rights under the warranty with her rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk).

Let's take the warranty first.  Any rights under the warranty are entirely separate from and nothing to do with any rights under the above legislation.

Whoever is granting the warranty (the seller or the manufacturer) can limit it by imposing any conditions they see fit.  If they say that under the warranty you are only entitled to a credit note, then that is all you are entitled to under the warranty.

Her rights against the seller under the legislation are different.

Generally, any fault that manifests itself within 6 months is legally presumed to have been present at purchase unless the seller can prove otherwise.  The seller then has one attempt either to repair or replace the faulty item.  If that repair or replacement is also faulty, the consumer is entitled to a full refund.

For faults manifesting themselves after 6 months, the consumer has to prove that the goods were faulty at purchase.  If the consumer can do that they are again entitled to a repair or replacement, but if the repair/replacement fails you can again get a refund, but the seller is entitled to reduce the refund to reflect the use the consumer has had of the goods.

Before anyone can give you any reliable advice, answer these questions:  Whom did you notify in November that the boots were faulty - the manufacturer or the seller?  And can you please also give precise dates of when the boots were bought and when you first notified either the manufacturer or the seller of the fault?

You need to give a detailed timeline.  You might(?) have been within the 6 months to get a full refund.  You might(?) also still be able to exercise the short-term right to reject.  We need precise dates of when and whom you spoke to.

Okell

Two more questions:  who is the seller and who is the manufacturer?

Undervalued

Jamie1012 said:

sheramber said:

Who did she buy from?  From a retailer or a direct from the manufacturer?

Warranty is from the manufacturer  but your wife's Consumer Rights is with the retailer that she bought them from.

She bought from a retailer. When I realised I had missed the standard returns window, I contacted the manufacturer directly, and they advised me to speak to the retailer, as it wasn't bought direct from the manufacturer.

I would have thought in this case, where the retailer doesn't want to replace or refund, they would send the boots to the manufacturer to repair at the manufacturer's expense, but admittedly I have no idea how this stuff works.

Except under the terms of any manufacturer's warranty, you have no contract and no claim with the manufacturer.

Your claim is against the retailer. They may (or may not) in turn have a claim against the manufacturer but that is not your problem. That is a business to business transaction so not covered by consumer legislation.