Purchased Nintendo Switch but it’s being sourced from abroad

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

eskbanker said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said: was simply about what actually makes a non-UK model unsuitable for use in the UK....

AFAIK they work fine as they aren't region locked.

OP was cornered about the warranty which Nintendo does say applies in the region the switch was purchased. If OP does end up getting the Switch delivered would be interesting to hear whether it comes with a fitted UK plug. 

"Concerned"?

Indeed  

I didn't look at the site, not sure their warranty would come close to Nintendo's, depends what it is I guess. 

eskbanker

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said: was simply about what actually makes a non-UK model unsuitable for use in the UK....

AFAIK they work fine as they aren't region locked.

OP was cornered about the warranty which Nintendo does say applies in the region the switch was purchased. If OP does end up getting the Switch delivered would be interesting to hear whether it comes with a fitted UK plug. 

"Concerned"?

Indeed  

I didn't look at the site, not sure their warranty would come close to Nintendo's, depends what it is I guess. 

It would seem a fairly safe bet that this retailer's warranty would be inferior to the manufacturer's!  However, to me that still doesn't necessarily constitute "breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”"?

km1500

I know you are annoyed and it is upsetting, but basically you go onto the world wide web and order a box from an unknown company at a cheap price. What would make you think is a uk company and a uk sourced product?

This is a genuine question by the way. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

eskbanker said:

It would seem a fairly safe bet that this retailer's warranty would be inferior to the manufacturer's!  However, to me that still doesn't necessarily constitute "breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”"?

In terms of the CCRs it is looking at the transactional decision of the average consumer and so doesn't require a specific breach in the sense you refer to, aside from anything I think the average person would simply place less trust in an import (rightly or wrongly) and thus not making it clear would be a be a breach resulting in right to unwind (I say think because that's my opinion, obviously only the opinion of a court really counts and with the CCRs being intentionally broad there's nothing specifically to cite). 

One thing that would be certain is if the switch arrived without a UK plug (or the adapter didn't meet UK requirements, which IIRC is fixed over the original plug and requiring a tool to remove) then the goods wouldn't confirm to the contract in terms of satisfactory quality with regards to safety. 

I think the best and easiest OP can hope for is non-delivery and refund via chargeback. 

eskbanker

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said:

It would seem a fairly safe bet that this retailer's warranty would be inferior to the manufacturer's!  However, to me that still doesn't necessarily constitute "breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”"?

In terms of the CCRs it is looking at the transactional decision of the average consumer and so doesn't require a specific breach in the sense you refer to, aside from anything I think the average person would simply place less trust in an import (rightly or wrongly) and thus not making it clear would be a be a breach resulting in right to unwind (I say think because that's my opinion, obviously only the opinion of a court really counts and with the CCRs being intentionally broad there's nothing specifically to cite). 

One thing that would be certain is if the switch arrived without a UK plug (or the adapter didn't meet UK requirements, which IIRC is fixed over the original plug and requiring a tool to remove) then the goods wouldn't confirm to the contract in terms of satisfactory quality with regards to safety. 

I think the best and easiest OP can hope for is non-delivery and refund via chargeback. 

Agreed, non-delivery would circumvent the whole issue, and a non-compliant plug would indeed be something more tangible and actionable than the vaguer concept of 'placing less trust in an import'.

screech_78

Aylesbury_Duck said:

GingerMoose24 said:

eskbanker said:

GingerMoose24 said:

The product page on Deal Monday’s website didn’t not state anywhere that the item could come from outside Europe. Whilst the Switch will still work as it’s not region locked, could I request a refund & return based on breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”. 

Conversely, did the product page say that it was UK-sourced, to support an allegation of 'not as described'?

No it did not. But I think a reasonable person would assume a product being purchased from a UK registered company would be from the UK unless stated otherwise. Additionally, a reasonable person would believe the manufacturers warranty would be valid and have no reason to assume otherwise. 

But was the price reasonable?  You said that their "prices were so low".  A reasonable person might wonder why a website was selling a product at a much lower price than all the other retailers.

Second this. 

I don’t get it. A Nintendo switch can be bought from pretty much any big electronics retailer or supermarket in the UK. The price is almost the same everywhere you buy, so I can only assume it was a vastly reduced price and for most people, common sense would say that alarm bells should be ringing. 

DullGreyGuy

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

eskbanker said:

It would seem a fairly safe bet that this retailer's warranty would be inferior to the manufacturer's!  However, to me that still doesn't necessarily constitute "breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”"?

In terms of the CCRs it is looking at the transactional decision of the average consumer and so doesn't require a specific breach in the sense you refer to, aside from anything I think the average person would simply place less trust in an import (rightly or wrongly) and thus not making it clear would be a be a breach resulting in right to unwind (I say think because that's my opinion, obviously only the opinion of a court really counts and with the CCRs being intentionally broad there's nothing specifically to cite). 

One thing that would be certain is if the switch arrived without a UK plug (or the adapter didn't meet UK requirements, which IIRC is fixed over the original plug and requiring a tool to remove) then the goods wouldn't confirm to the contract in terms of satisfactory quality with regards to safety. 

I think the best and easiest OP can hope for is non-delivery and refund via chargeback. 

Well first of all, they are all imports. Nintendo do not manufacture goods in the UK, all their goods, no matter which region they are destined for are made in China and Vietnam and then imported. 

I agree that the average person would put less trust in a generic item bought in the UK -v- one bought from some overseas countries, though they may place more trust in one from Germany than the UK. This however isn't a generic item but a branded one and will be to the Nintendo standard no matter where it's destined for. Having seen the number of people buying iPhones etc when in a low cost region I would argue that most people, assuming no concerns on it being a fake, consider them to have uniform quality. 

More accurately it would have to be a charger that isn't a UK 3pin or an appropriate adapter. A quick search online shows in the EU at least its sold without any adapter as its a generic USB DC power requirement, assuming the advert didnt promise a charger then having no charger would also be complaint. Many phones these days are sold sans charger.


None delivery is possibly the best out but most people complain about slow delivery not no delivery. If it is delivered then it would have to be returned which is likely to be expensive to China/HK and the chargeback is only likely to succeed once the returns tracking shows it as delivered back - which there isn't a good hit rate of typically.

born_again

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

GingerMoose24 said:

Its only been 10 days since order was originally made, so I think I would need to wait until at least 30 before non receipt. 

IIRC standard timeframe for VISA and Mastercard is 15 days but I assume the bank will consider the retailer timeframe (i.e if they say 4 weeks you might not be able to do a chargeback until that 4 weeks have passed). 

Not sure what they look at but worth checking the delivery time given on your order emails and using that. 

@born_again is our resident expert on this and will likely clarify and/or correct anything I've gotten wrong. 

Visa 15, Mastercard 30 days from date of debit. Although if you have a fixed date for delivery (not delivery in 4 to 5 days) then it could be done from that date. But is safer to wait till day after timescales. To avoid any technical rejection.

Not being UK spec would not be a chargeback right.

born_again

GingerMoose24 said:

eskbanker said:

GingerMoose24 said:

The product page on Deal Monday’s website didn’t not state anywhere that the item could come from outside Europe. Whilst the Switch will still work as it’s not region locked, could I request a refund & return based on breach of contract as the product is “not as described or fit for purpose”. 

Conversely, did the product page say that it was UK-sourced, to support an allegation of 'not as described'?

No it did not. But I think a reasonable person would assume a product being purchased from a UK registered company would be from the UK unless stated otherwise. Additionally, a reasonable person would believe the manufacturers warranty would be valid and have no reason to assume otherwise. 

A valid point. As most people would never think of looking at anything other than the "What they Want" & then purchase.

But as a cynical person, as well as something that drops into my field of work.
Always checking T/C, returns etc on a site I have never used before is a must. 
So many of these sites that look the same are built on the same platform shoot them selves in the foot.

Example here from their site. 

https://www.dealmonday.co.uk/privacy

By using the PrettyLittleThing Website or services you agree to us placing cookies on your device and accessing the information stored within these cookies when you visit or use our services in the future. Please note that deleting or disabling the use of cookies may affect your experience and limit the functionality you can use. Further information about cookies can be found on the ICO website here

They simply copy & paste other retailers info...

There is one going round social media at the moment selling footwear for the more mature people. Stating they are from London.
The only link to London is a pin on their website with London next to it. When you look at the T/C & returns. It's a chinese retailer.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

DullGreyGuy said:

Well first of all, they are all imports.

Being lazy again For import read designated for an alternative international market. 

DullGreyGuy said:

More accurately it would have to be a charger that isn't a UK 3pin or an appropriate adapter. A quick search online shows in the EU at least its sold without any adapter as its a generic USB DC power requirement, assuming the advert didnt promise a charger then having no charger would also be complaint. Many phones these days are sold sans charger.

Mine (albeit purchased years ago) comes with a proper moulded plug, if they now just come with a cable and you find your own plug that would obviously comply with the regs regarding plugs. 

DullGreyGuy said:

I agree that the average person would put less trust in a generic item bought in the UK -v- one bought from some overseas countries, though they may place more trust in one from Germany than the UK. This however isn't a generic item but a branded one and will be to the Nintendo standard no matter where it's destined for. Having seen the number of people buying iPhones etc when in a low cost region I would argue that most people, assuming no concerns on it being a fake, consider them to have uniform quality. 

Bolded makes perfect makes sense but still think there is a stigma attached to it. 

eskbanker said:

Agreed, non-delivery would circumvent the whole issue, and a non-compliant plug would indeed be something more tangible and actionable than the vaguer concept of 'placing less trust in an import'.

It's all vague really with the CPRs, or rather non-specific, but as above arguing such, or any aspect of consumer rights really, may very well be fruitless in this case.