Am I entitled to an exchange?

Alderbank

Penguin_ said:

So if I buy something & I damage it accidentally, as long as its within the first 6 months the onus is on the business to show it was ok when I got it?

If the item is damaged and the case goes to court, the judge will look for evidence. If he can't see any either way he will give the benefit of the doubt to the consumer.

Among the evidence he will consider will be Penguin's legally binding Statement of Truth formally declaring he did not do the damage. Perjury is quite a serious criminal offence.

Okell

Penguin_ said:

So if I buy something & I damage it accidentally, as long as its within the first 6 months the onus is on the business to show it was ok when I got it?

That's what s19(14) and (15)(a) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 say:

"(14) For the purposes of subsections (3)(b) and (c) and (4), goods which do not conform to the contract at any time within the period of six months beginning with the day on which the goods were delivered to the consumer must be taken not to have conformed to it on that day.

(15) Subsection (14) does not apply if—

(a) it is established that the goods did conform to the contract on that day, or

(b) its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or with how they fail to conform to the contract"

But if the trader doesn't accept your lie "argument" and you take it to court, you would be committing perjury if you omitted from your sworn witness statement that you had caused the damage yourself.

Ergates

Penguin_ said:

So if I buy something & I damage it accidentally, as long as its within the first 6 months the onus is on the business to show it was ok when I got it?

Realistically - if it's physical damage, then unless you're claiming as soon as you open it, then you're unlikely to win that argument in court.   

"Yeah, I bought this phone 5 months ago, but only noticed the screen was cracked today" isn't going to get you anywhere.


If, however, you bought (say) a sink and you accidentally cracked whilst unwrapping it, then yes - the onus would be on the company to prove it was you and not them.