Section 75 on a Pram

born_again

Do you not have any other pram shops that you could go to?

born_again

Jellynailer said:

In law, the retailer is responsible for dealing with the first year of a manufacturer's warranty/guarantee.

Bambino and me Ltd is registered with Companies House reg. no. SC694418;  Registered address: Office 18, 259 Summerlee Street, Glasgow, G33 4DB; only one director: Louise McCaffery who is also the owner.  If it was dissolved since its last accounts this should show in the files but it does not.  Next confirmation filing not due until end of December.

Checked Trustpilot:  address given as  54 Gordon Street G1 3PU but no reviews since 2023.  Can't access email address but have security block on sites not https.

Hope this is of some use.

Your consumer rights are with the retailer.
There is no Law that forces retailer to deal with a manufacture warranty/guarantee, which are separate & over & above your consumer rights.

Have you got a source stating they are dissolved? As can not find anything online stating this?

Okell

DullGreyGuy said:

Jellynailer said:

In law, the retailer is responsible for dealing with the first year of a manufacturer's warranty/guarantee.

Which law @jellynailer? The Consumer Rights Act states its assumed an issue is inherent in the first 6 months of ownership unless the retailer can prove otherwise, not 12 months. 

As @DullGreyGuy says, the comment by Jellynailer is utter rubbish...

Jaybuck

born_again said:

Jellynailer said:

In law, the retailer is responsible for dealing with the first year of a manufacturer's warranty/guarantee.

Bambino and me Ltd is registered with Companies House reg. no. SC694418;  Registered address: Office 18, 259 Summerlee Street, Glasgow, G33 4DB; only one director: Louise McCaffery who is also the owner.  If it was dissolved since its last accounts this should show in the files but it does not.  Next confirmation filing not due until end of December.

Checked Trustpilot:  address given as  54 Gordon Street G1 3PU but no reviews since 2023.  Can't access email address but have security block on sites not https.

Hope this is of some use.

Your consumer rights are with the retailer.
There is no Law that forces retailer to deal with a manufacture warranty/guarantee, which are separate & over & above your consumer rights.

Have you got a source stating they are dissolved? As can not find anything online stating this?

No just cannot get hold of them in any way shape or form. Their website is offline and no reviews since 2023.

Jaybuck

born_again said:

Do you not have any other pram shops that you could go to?

I could but not sure that firstly they would be interested in helping and secondly whether Amex would accept them as someone to offer an impartial opinion on the failure of the pram and why it failed

Jaybuck

born_again said:

Was the product not registered with the manufacture?

No it wasn't unfortunately.

Jaybuck

DullGreyGuy said:

Jaybuck said:

Thanks for taking the time to reply Aylesbury_Duck

The have been specific in stating that they must be from the related industry. See below copy from their email.

"The company that conducts such a report must be independent from any party involved in the claim in question and trade within the related industry"

What is the pram made of? 

The law doesn't state how you should prove it is a defect just that its your obligation to (noting others comments that civil law is on "the balance of probabilities" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt" that criminal law is judged on). 

If it's a ferric metal then a bodyshop may be able to give advice, if its aluminium or plastic etc then a different type of fabricator may be more appropriate. 

Jellynailer said:

In law, the retailer is responsible for dealing with the first year of a manufacturer's warranty/guarantee.

Which law @jellynailer? The Consumer Rights Act states its assumed an issue is inherent in the first 6 months of ownership unless the retailer can prove otherwise, not 12 months. 

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Be careful with how you deal with Amex.  I believe S75 only applies if you are the beneficiary.  You buying and gifting the pram to your daughter may be viewed as breaking the chain.  It doesn't sound like Amex are quibbling about it, but I think they may be able to.

This is a concept made up by various "consumer champions", the law itself has no mention of beneficiaries. 

What the law states is that there has to be a direct relationship between Debtor (the OP), Creditor (AmEx) and Supplier without other parties (a previous court case clarified we can turn a blind eye to the supplier merchant services provider). 

The Debtor has to have a contract with the Creditor. The Debtor must have a contract with the Supplier. The Creditor must pay the monies to the Supplier. Where things break down is when you buy from say Amazon Marketplace or a travel agent because the Creditor pays the money to Amazon/Hays Travel but its AnkerDirect or Hilton that is actually the supplier of the goods/services. 

"Beneficiary" has come in when trying to argue the chain hasn't broken... so for example a secondary cardholder buys a sofa for the family home. On the surface the chain is broken because the Debtor doesn't have a contract with the Supplier because it was the secondary cardholder that bought it however some will try to argue that the cardholder is a beneficiary of the sofa and so whilst the paperwork says only Mr bought it in reality Mr & Mrs bought it together so actually the chain isn't broken. 

The Ombudsman has certainly looked favourably in some cases with these types of arguments, especially when backed up by confirmation that they went to the store together, spoke to the sales person together and its just that he got his card out quicker than her that it happened to go on the secondary card.

Thanks for the advice will check the material and follow your advice.

saajan_12

Jaybuck said:

It was bought in Feb 22 and she was born at the end of July.

It July this year it broke at a weld rendering it unusable. ...

j

EssexHebridean said:

Ultimately, an item is expected to last A reasonable length of time - most people will use a pram for what - 2-3 years assuming that it is one of the type that take a child through from newborn to toddler - so just 12 months in use (albeit 17 months from point of purchase) really doesn’t sound reasonable! 

Its 2 years of use, or 2.5 years since purchase, which to me does sound within the range of reasonable. Especially when prams for toddlers could go through a battering, so there's going to be a lot of variation. 

Ergates

Jellynailer said:

In law, the retailer is responsible for dealing with the first year of a manufacturer's warranty/guarantee.

There is no law that either states of infers that.

Ergates

EssexHebridean said:

Ultimately, an item is expected to last A reasonable length of time - most people will use a pram for what - 2-3 years assuming that it is one of the type that take a child through from newborn to toddler - so just 12 months in use (albeit 17 months from point of purchase) really doesn’t sound reasonable! 

Moreover - the average number of children for a family in the UK is above 1.7 - so with *most* families, it'll get used by more than one child - so make that 5 or 6 years.