Faulty goods (bicycle) and credit card purchase protection options?

bitmadmax

Hi all, thanks for reading and apologies as I wasn't sure if to put this in the credit card forum.

In June I purchased a bicycle from a major bicycle brand. I have bought my bikes from this same retailer for many years so was happy to use them again and have never had any issues until now.

In July I noticed a manufacturing defect when I was setting the bike up, and it is quite obvious at that point but not something I picked up on during handover.
So I took the bike back to the retailer and they agreed there seemed to be a "quality control" issue.

Anyway, to cut a very long story short I have been fobbed off and back and to over the past few months. They are now saying the "fault" is "within manufacturing tolerance". Actually, I feel that is rubbish and is obviously not something that would be considered in tolerance even by someone who was not clued up in bicycles. They have offered me "the next model up" to the bike that I purchased and said it was brand new. When I inspected the frame it was evidently soiled and the frame was over a year old just by looking at the frame number. I declined as I originally set out to buy a new bike and not spend thousands on a used bicycle or one that I had no idea what its history was, if it had been abused etc.

I have one last thing to try with the retailer but if they don't offer a solution I am happy with or refuse to refund me I am considering going either down the chargeback or section 75 route and get some money back that way.

The circumstances are I paid a deposit of £500 on credit card and the remaining ~£4000 balance on the same credit card. I first noticed the issue on 20th July (admittedly this was a month after I bought the bike but was only when I got round to actually setting it up, adjusting etc to suit me). The bike has not been used and is still with the retailer.

I think I have been more than accommodating in trying to get a resolution with the retailer, perhaps a little too accommodating?

As I understand it I have a 120 day time limit to go down the chargeback route (so I would need to start that process before 20th November i.e 10/11 days from now, or 120 days since I first noticed the issue). But there is potentially no time limit with section 75?

So my question is, given the above should I go down the chargeback route or section 75? 

Sorry for the long post but thanks for reading and any advice!

eskbanker

bitmadmax said:

As I understand it I have a 120 day time limit to go down the chargeback route (so I would need to start that process before 20th November i.e 10/11 days from now, or 120 days since I first noticed the issue).

My understanding is that a chargeback claim for faulty goods would need to be initiated within 120 days of taking ownership, rather than starting from when an issue was spotted, but, as you say, no similar time limit with s75 (other than six years statute of limitations).

bitmadmax

eskbanker said:

My understanding is that a chargeback claim for faulty goods would need to be initiated within 120 days of taking ownership, rather than starting from when an issue was spotted, but, as you say, no similar time limit with s75 (other than six years statute of limitations).

Thanks, s75 it is then. Thought I saw somewhere the 120 days can start from when the issue was noticed.

eskbanker

bitmadmax said:

eskbanker said:

My understanding is that a chargeback claim for faulty goods would need to be initiated within 120 days of taking ownership, rather than starting from when an issue was spotted, but, as you say, no similar time limit with s75 (other than six years statute of limitations).

Thanks, s75 it is then. Thought I saw somewhere the 120 days can start from when the issue was noticed.

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong - chargeback rules are notoriously opaque rather than having a clear published definitive guide!

However, if timeframes were to be based on when an issue was spotted then that could potentially result in claims being raised years after sale and that's really not what the 'faulty goods' provisions cover - they're much more restricted than s75's wider 'breach of contract' scope....

Okell

bitmadmax said:

Hi all, thanks for reading and apologies as I wasn't sure if to put this in the credit card forum.

... In June I purchased a bicycle from a major bicycle brand. I have bought my bikes from this same retailer for many years so was happy to use them again and have never had any issues until now...

That's a bit confusing.  Did you buy it from the manufacturer ("brand") or from a retailer?

If you bought from a retailer, have you tried asking the manufacturer what they think of the fault and whether it is within tolerance?

Are there no other local bike shops whose opinion you could ask?

The legal position is that any faults that manifest within 6 months of purchase are legally presumed to have been present at the time of sale, unless the seller can prove otherwise.  Legally the seller is allowed one single attempt either to repair or replace the faulty item.  If that attempt fails you can get a refund.  After more than 6 months after purcahse any refund can be reduced to account for the use you've had of the item.

I'm not sure if the seller's (1) refusal to accept that there is a fault and (2) their offer to provide a "new" bike might in any way affect a s75 claim.

Before going down the s75 route you might want to ask the manufacturer their view and try a second opinion from another bike shop.

If the item is faulty and the seller can't prove it wasn't present on the day of sale, bear in mind that if you want a full refund you need to reject it before 6 months is up

born_again

bitmadmax said:

Hi all, thanks for reading and apologies as I wasn't sure if to put this in the credit card forum.

In June I purchased a bicycle from a major bicycle brand. I have bought my bikes from this same retailer for many years so was happy to use them again and have never had any issues until now.

In July I noticed a manufacturing defect when I was setting the bike up, and it is quite obvious at that point but not something I picked up on during handover.
So I took the bike back to the retailer and they agreed there seemed to be a "quality control" issue.

Anyway, to cut a very long story short I have been fobbed off and back and to over the past few months. They are now saying the "fault" is "within manufacturing tolerance". Actually, I feel that is rubbish and is obviously not something that would be considered in tolerance even by someone who was not clued up in bicycles. They have offered me "the next model up" to the bike that I purchased and said it was brand new. When I inspected the frame it was evidently soiled and the frame was over a year old just by looking at the frame number. I declined as I originally set out to buy a new bike and not spend thousands on a used bicycle or one that I had no idea what its history was, if it had been abused etc.

I have one last thing to try with the retailer but if they don't offer a solution I am happy with or refuse to refund me I am considering going either down the chargeback or section 75 route and get some money back that way.

The circumstances are I paid a deposit of £500 on credit card and the remaining ~£4000 balance on the same credit card. I first noticed the issue on 20th July (admittedly this was a month after I bought the bike but was only when I got round to actually setting it up, adjusting etc to suit me). The bike has not been used and is still with the retailer.

I think I have been more than accommodating in trying to get a resolution with the retailer, perhaps a little too accommodating?

As I understand it I have a 120 day time limit to go down the chargeback route (so I would need to start that process before 20th November i.e 10/11 days from now, or 120 days since I first noticed the issue). But there is potentially no time limit with section 75?

So my question is, given the above should I go down the chargeback route or section 75? 

Sorry for the long post but thanks for reading and any advice!

What is the actual fault?

You are going to need a 3rd party report on the issue. Given the retailer & Manufacture? Seem to think it is OK. For a S75.

bitmadmax said:

eskbanker said:

My understanding is that a chargeback claim for faulty goods would need to be initiated within 120 days of taking ownership, rather than starting from when an issue was spotted, but, as you say, no similar time limit with s75 (other than six years statute of limitations).

Thanks, s75 it is then. Thought I saw somewhere the 120 days can start from when the issue was noticed.

Faulty chargeback has to be at point of purchase. It does not cover ongoing issues.