TP-Link / Tapo LED Lights - Box states cuttable, then product fails and CS say no warranty if cut

Im_A_Mouse_In_Need

Alderbank said:

Im_A_Mouse_In_Need said:

I posted on the TP-Link forum as well. No response there but I have since had another CS email saying:

We have consulted with our RMA team regarding your case for a replacement. We will notify you as soon as the RMA approval is received, and at that time, we will provide you with the necessary instructions to proceed with the replacement process.

---------------

I can't tell if they are just offering to replace the controller that got bricked, or they have changed stance on the light strip as well.

But I replied saying I no longer want a replacement, I requested a full refund instead.

To be fair, you originally asked for a replacement and that seems to be what they are getting round to doing (I asked TP-Link if I could replace...).

Having chosen to ask for a replacement you can't now chop and change. You are only entitled to switch to a refund if the replacement is itself faulty or it takes too long to arrive, and in practice you have no effective remedy in law if the replacement takes longer than you believe it should.

But when I first asked for a replacement, I was unaware that this product cannot be cut without losing your warranty. This claim is still unsubstantiated, it's just something the CS person has come out with, there's nothing in their conditions to prove their case. Is that not a change of terms of contract?

If they replace the light strip, I can't cut it. I wouldn't have bought the product then. The packaging is misleading.

Do you still think the customer can't change their mind and must accept the replacement under warranty terms that were not shown anywhere?

QrizB

Did you send TP-Link a photo to show exactly where you had cut the tape?

Could you share that photo here?

GDB2222

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07205003

That is the company that you have bought from. If all else fails, you can always issue proceedings using MCOL. The company can decide whether to defend the proceedings or pay your refund. In practice, unless you are obviously ‘trying it on' they will pay you. 

Alderbank

Im_A_Mouse_In_Need said:

Alderbank said:

Im_A_Mouse_In_Need said:

I posted on the TP-Link forum as well. No response there but I have since had another CS email saying:

We have consulted with our RMA team regarding your case for a replacement. We will notify you as soon as the RMA approval is received, and at that time, we will provide you with the necessary instructions to proceed with the replacement process.

---------------

I can't tell if they are just offering to replace the controller that got bricked, or they have changed stance on the light strip as well.

But I replied saying I no longer want a replacement, I requested a full refund instead.

To be fair, you originally asked for a replacement and that seems to be what they are getting round to doing (I asked TP-Link if I could replace...).

Having chosen to ask for a replacement you can't now chop and change. You are only entitled to switch to a refund if the replacement is itself faulty or it takes too long to arrive, and in practice you have no effective remedy in law if the replacement takes longer than you believe it should.

Do you still think the customer can't change their mind and must accept the replacement under warranty terms that were not shown anywhere?

Do I still think the customer can't change their mind and must accept the replacement...

Doesn't matter what I think. I'll let you do the work. Here is your consumer right. It is s23(7) of the Consumer Rights Act:

A consumer who requires or agrees to the replacement of goods cannot require the trader to repair them, or exercise the short-term right to reject, without giving the trader a reasonable time to replace them.

How do you interpret that?

Also, don't mix up the warranty stuff with your consumer rights. They are quite separate. A warranty can't take away from your consumer rights and this warranty doesn't seem to add anything to your consumer rights anyway.

If you think they have taken too long to replace the item you can exercise another of your consumer rights and tell them that you are now exercising your final right to reject for a full refund because they have now breached 2(24(c) of CRA. This says you are entitled to a refund if you asked for a replacement but they failed to do so 'within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.'

born_again

Alderbank said:

If you think they have taken too long to replace the item you can exercise another of your consumer rights and tell them that you are now exercising your final right to reject for a full refund because they have now breached 2(24(c) of CRA. This says you are entitled to a refund if you asked for a replacement but they failed to do so 'within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.'

Genuine question.
On this point.
As OP has altered the item (cut shorter) even if they say you can.
Could they use that as a reason to either refuse a return/exchange. Or even reduce a refund amount?

dumpster_fire2025

user1977 said:

dumpster_fire2025 said:

They're saying that whilst you CAN cut it on the dotted (scissor) lines if you do so, it will void your warranty.

It might void whatever additional "warranty" there is, but that doesn't affect the OP's consumer rights to receive a product which does what it claims to do.

But it does do what it's claimed to do. It lights up your home in a suitably garish fashion, no?

The question is whether being told you CAN cut across the lines is "at your own risk" or "acceptable use of the product."

Given TP-Link is a company that produces (almost) the finest Chinesium with little regard for the law, if you bought direct it may be throwing good money after bad.

ThumbRemote

born_again said:

Alderbank said:

If you think they have taken too long to replace the item you can exercise another of your consumer rights and tell them that you are now exercising your final right to reject for a full refund because they have now breached 2(24(c) of CRA. This says you are entitled to a refund if you asked for a replacement but they failed to do so 'within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.'

Genuine question.
On this point.
As OP has altered the item (cut shorter) even if they say you can.
Could they use that as a reason to either refuse a return/exchange. Or even reduce a refund amount?

No. 
The OP has used the product entirely in line with the manufacturers instructions. It is designed to be cut and advertised with that as a feature. 

dumpster_fire2025

ThumbRemote said:

born_again said:

Alderbank said:

If you think they have taken too long to replace the item you can exercise another of your consumer rights and tell them that you are now exercising your final right to reject for a full refund because they have now breached 2(24(c) of CRA. This says you are entitled to a refund if you asked for a replacement but they failed to do so 'within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.'

Genuine question.
On this point.
As OP has altered the item (cut shorter) even if they say you can.
Could they use that as a reason to either refuse a return/exchange. Or even reduce a refund amount?

No. 
The OP has used the product entirely in line with the manufacturers instructions. It is designed to be cut and advertised with that as a feature. 

They've said it is cuttable.

Most things are.

However, the fact that they've put the onus on the consumer would indicate that they're passing the responsibility to said consumer.

I actually think a judge would agree with the OP, but TP-Link have an office that is use for warehouse purposes only in the UK, so I doubt the OP will get much satisfaction from the court system.

user1977

dumpster_fire2025 said:

user1977 said:

dumpster_fire2025 said:

They're saying that whilst you CAN cut it on the dotted (scissor) lines if you do so, it will void your warranty.

It might void whatever additional "warranty" there is, but that doesn't affect the OP's consumer rights to receive a product which does what it claims to do.

But it does do what it's claimed to do. It lights up your home in a suitably garish fashion, no?

The question is whether being told you CAN cut across the lines is "at your own risk" or "acceptable use of the product."

It’s literally illustrated in the manufacturers instructions above, not the OP’s own wacky idea.

RefluentBeans

born_again said:

Alderbank said:

If you think they have taken too long to replace the item you can exercise another of your consumer rights and tell them that you are now exercising your final right to reject for a full refund because they have now breached 2(24(c) of CRA. This says you are entitled to a refund if you asked for a replacement but they failed to do so 'within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.'

Genuine question.
On this point.
As OP has altered the item (cut shorter) even if they say you can.
Could they use that as a reason to either refuse a return/exchange. Or even reduce a refund amount?

I guess the answer is it depends on the situation. In this case probably not. 

In the case of a 3-piece suite having one component failed but one other piece thrown away before the fault (so 2 only being available) I guess the retailer could factor that into a reduction of a refund amount. 

Think it’s one of those things which are super niche and situational - only when you go through Small Claims could a judge tell you their opinion (which whilst doesn’t form precedence, can at least tell you what the court may deem important in deciding the case).