Faulty item out of warranty - where do I stand legally.

older_sadder_and_wiser

I'm hoping one of you experts might be able to help me out with some advice.

A little over three years ago, I purchased a high end treadmill running machine from a company called Fitness Superstore. It was £ 3k. When I bought the item I was offered interest free payments for V12 finance, which I decided to take advantage of. The finance has been fully paid off with no late payments - not that this matters in this case.

The warranty on the treadmill was stated to be 2 years from date of purchase.

The machine failed about a month before its third birthday. Now the treadmill has had very little use. Recently, however, we converted out garage into a gym and my wife and I started to use it. I has probably less than 20-30 hours use from new and is immaculate.

I contacted Fitness Superstore and they referred me to a third party service company that they apparently are very friendly with. This third party told me that the PCB B board had failed, and this was common fault. The manufacturer of the Treadmill (Bowflex) had gone into administration, and as this was a common fault, all stock of the boards had been used up, but hopefully someone would buy the company and put the spares back into production.

So I went back to Fitness Superstore. They asked me to get the third party service provider to send them an email confirming this - which was done. They then said I had to give them the opportunity to source the board and they would come back to me.

The usual dance began. They never called me back, so two weeks later I called again, and was promised a call back, which never came. I then called them three days later and was told that the board was indeed not available, so they couldn't help me.

I pointed out that they were still selling the item on their website, and they told me that anyone purchasing the item would be covered under warranty and would get a repair if it failed. I asked how they would do this if they couldn't get the part. Unsurprisingly, I never got a satisfactory reply to that particular  question.

I then complained to the V12 finance company, and the first reply I got was non-sensical - they told the finance company that the machine had been heavily used and been hammered, that I was trying to get a free repair in 'not fit for purpose' and that I should contact then if I wanted a paid for repair. It is almost as if the person from Fitness Superstore speaking to the finance company was rather in the dark as to what was going on. (And that is being generous)

I put the finance company straight and explained I was prepared to pay for a repair, but they were denying me one, unlike someone who was under warranty.

I got a letter back from the finance company, telling me that Fitness Superstore were now picking up the servicing for the manufacturer, and told me I should contact them to organise a repair.

You guessed it, I called Fitness Superstore, and they told me they had no Bowflex Parts available and could not offer me a repair. Back to square one.

I've gone back to the Finance Company, but I'd like to clarify my consumer rights here. I'm glad I used V12 finance as they seem to a far more professional operation.

There's another point about Fitness Superstore, who are supposed to be the largest fitness equipment supplier in the UK.

They are currently selling the exact same model of treadmill - a £ 3k item- to customers, that they absolutely know their customer will not be able to service or repair 24 months later as they have no parts. I reckon they are dumping their stock on unaware customers and hoping to get away with it. In my opinion, that is very shabby business practice.

So is there a legal basis in which I can put pressure onto the finance company. I paid £ 3k for an item that failed with no repair available om a machine less than 3 years old, and very, very lightly used ? 

Any advice would be gratefully received, as I am unsure on how to proceed.

Thank you in advance for anyone who can give me some advice.

eskbanker

A section 75 claim may be viable if you had a regulated credit agreement, but the small print on V12's site suggests that they're a broker rather than a lender, so you'd need to ensure that you pursued the correct entity - check your paperwork first!

Section 75 (of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) holds the creditor jointly and severally liable with the merchant, i.e. you have the same rights with each, but you need to prove that there's a breach of contract....

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases/

older_sadder_and_wiser

eskbanker said:

A section 75 claim may be viable if you had a regulated credit agreement, but the small print on V12's site suggests that they're a broker rather than a lender, so you'd need to ensure that you pursued the correct entity - check your paperwork first!

Section 75 (of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) holds the creditor jointly and severally liable with the merchant, i.e. you have the same rights with each, but you need to prove that there's a breach of contract....

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases/

Thank you for that, but at this point I'm looking into any consumer law that would cover the failure of the product. Once I can clarify that, then I can pursue both parties for resolution. But I am grateful for your reply and I do thank you for taking the time to reply. I will certainly read through the link supplied.

eskbanker

older_sadder_and_wiser said:

Thank you for that, but at this point I'm looking into any consumer law that would cover the failure of the product. Once I can clarify that, then I can pursue both parties for resolution. But I am grateful for your reply and I do thank you for taking the time to reply. I will certainly read through the link supplied.

Oh I see - in that case you need to be reviewing the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and in particular the requirement for goods to be of satisfactory quality, including, inter alia, durability:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1/chapter/2/crossheading/what-statutory-rights-are-there-under-a-goods-contract

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

eskbanker said:

older_sadder_and_wiser said:

Thank you for that, but at this point I'm looking into any consumer law that would cover the failure of the product. Once I can clarify that, then I can pursue both parties for resolution. But I am grateful for your reply and I do thank you for taking the time to reply. I will certainly read through the link supplied.

Oh I see - in that case you need to be reviewing the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and in particular the requirement for goods to be of satisfactory quality, including, inter alia, durability:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1/chapter/2/crossheading/what-statutory-rights-are-there-under-a-goods-contract

In addition to the good advice above, you would be entitled to your choice of a free repair or a replacement.

There is a caveat about one being disproportionate to the other but with a repair being pretty disproportionate (they'd have to take a board out of a brand new machine) you'd have a good argument for a replacement.
 
That said if they refuse either then you are looking at the final right to reject for a refund reduced to account for use (does the tread mill record how long it's been used for since owned?).

There was a sofa thread on here with V12 where there was Section 75 cover so certainly worth following up on that, V12 be jointly liable and you'd be able to chase them for the refund if the retailer were to be difficult (or indeed if you just wanted to).

Burden of proof does lie with yourself, hopefully the information gathered so far would be sufficient, if not you'd have to get someone independent to inspect and put on paper what is wrong with the machine and ideally why it failed or that it's less than likely to be user error/misuse, etc and then add the cost of the inspection to the claim.

It seems a fair number of companies do their best to pay as little as possible when customers are entitled to a refund so always worth haggling if you feel the amount deducted from the original price doesn't reflect a fair amount of use. 

theoretica

The other option to explore would be whether someone who knows electronics can repair the faulty board?  This will depend on what the fault is.  Or find a different one which does the same job?  Again, depend on what it does. 

older_sadder_and_wiser

Thank you so much for this. Looks like I've got my homework cut out for the weekend !

So it seems that I should use the provisions of the consumer rights act to demand from both parties that a resolution is offered. When they reject that (I am assuming they will here) the next step is to what - Trading Standards ? or got strain to county court.

I am such a novice at this.

theoretica said:

The other option to explore would be whether someone who knows electronics can repair the faulty board?  This will depend on what the fault is.  Or find a different one which does the same job?  Again, depend on what it does. 

I think the potential problem is that if I engage a non approved third party, and they fail to resolve the issue, I may be unable to pursue the matter afterwards. But I thank you for your idea.

Also I would still be stuck with an item that is effectively - not serviceable or repairable......

older_sadder_and_wiser

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said:

older_sadder_and_wiser said:

Thank you for that, but at this point I'm looking into any consumer law that would cover the failure of the product. Once I can clarify that, then I can pursue both parties for resolution. But I am grateful for your reply and I do thank you for taking the time to reply. I will certainly read through the link supplied.

Oh I see - in that case you need to be reviewing the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and in particular the requirement for goods to be of satisfactory quality, including, inter alia, durability:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1/chapter/2/crossheading/what-statutory-rights-are-there-under-a-goods-contract

In addition to the good advice above, you would be entitled to your choice of a free repair or a replacement.

There is a caveat about one being disproportionate to the other but with a repair being pretty disproportionate (they'd have to take a board out of a brand new machine) you'd have a good argument for a replacement.
 
That said if they refuse either then you are looking at the final right to reject for a refund reduced to account for use (does the tread mill record how long it's been used for since owned?).

There was a sofa thread on here with V12 where there was Section 75 cover so certainly worth following up on that, V12 be jointly liable and you'd be able to chase them for the refund if the retailer were to be difficult (or indeed if you just wanted to).

Burden of proof does lie with yourself, hopefully the information gathered so far would be sufficient, if not you'd have to get someone independent to inspect and put on paper what is wrong with the machine and ideally why it failed or that it's less than likely to be user error/misuse, etc and then add the cost of the inspection to the claim.

It seems a fair number of companies do their best to pay as little as possible when customers are entitled to a refund so always worth haggling if you feel the amount deducted from the original price doesn't reflect a fair amount of use. 

Under which sections of to act do you think I could make a successful claim. Durability ?

The treadmill may well keep an account of it's use - and again it may not, but it would have to be repaired to access that data.....

eskbanker

older_sadder_and_wiser said:

So it seems that I should use the provisions of the consumer rights act to demand from both parties that a resolution is offered. When they reject that (I am assuming they will here) the next step is to what - Trading Standards ? or got strain to county court.

Trading Standards won't help you but might add your voice to others to pursue the company independently.

Court is really the only viable escalation mechanism for a dispute with the retailer, but if you go down the s75 route with the finance company then that brings the Financial Ombudsman Service into play if needed....

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Hello OP

Yes it’s durability under the section covering satisfactory quality.

As above I’d start with S75 and Ombudsman

If you can get any data showing use it would be significantly favourable to your claim. 

older_sadder_and_wiser

Thanks for all the fantastic help. I'm on it, and I will make sure to let you all know how I get on. I