Xiaomi possibly refusing refund - Section 75 or Chargeback?

Gaberdeen

I purchased a new (£300) smartphone for my missus in May (15th) on my Credit Card (Mastercard) and after an OTA update last week - the sim card slots in the phone stopped working - i.e. no cell signal at all. I've tried everything I feasibly could, even before getting in touch with customer services, which is;

Restarting phone
Trying different sim-cards
factory reset

There's no roll-back facility on the OS update (which I suspect was the event that triggered the fault) so I contacted Xiaomi customer service who after asking-for and receiving the payment invoice & IMEI numbers of the device said:

"As the device is now beyond the replacement/refund timeframe (30 days), we’re unable to authorise a direct exchange or refund. However, we would like to assist you further*."

They then proceed to list a series of things to try that I've already tried, things that I shouldn't need to do to a 7-week old phone.

*I know the above is total !!!!!! - I wrote back a nice long email explaining that I know my rights under UK law and that they are in breach of contract / need to remedy the situation.We don't really want a replacement phone as this episode has exposed just how shoddy these devices are and I'd rather get my money back while I can.

I'm now in a back-and-forth with Xiaomi and have basically threatened to do either a chargeback or an S75 claim if I don't get satisfaction - my question more broadly is - has anyone else had a similar situation and should they refuse to refund me, which route should I take to gain redress?

I know there's a 120 day time-limit on chargebacks and we're on day 47 - I'd think that would be the easiest route to go down? 

Be genuinely interested in hearing any advice or gleaning any insight as to how this has played out for others.

Alderbank

Just to confirm, is this the seller you bought the phone from?

Xiaomi Technology UK Limited,
Davidson House,
Forbury Square,
Reading,
RG1 3EU

Gaberdeen

Alderbank said:

Just to confirm, is this the seller you bought the phone from?

Xiaomi Technology UK Limited,
Davidson House,
Forbury Square,
Reading,
RG1 3EU

Hi There

Details on the invoice as below - so yes, same seller.

Registered Office

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY UK LIMITED
E-mail: service.uk@support.mi.com
Davidson House, Forbury Square,
Reading, Berkshire RG1 3EU

Hotline: 0800 0211888

UK Registration No. 2018B16415
VAT Number: GB 310 8208 44

screech_78

If it’s over 30 days from purchase, you’re not entitled to a refund just yet.

The retailer has one opportunity to repair or replace, depending on what is most cost efficient for them. If after a repair or a replacement, a further fault develops, then you can use your final right to reject. If within 6 months of purchase, this would be a full refund. If after 6 months, a partial refund. 

born_again

Chargeback would not cover this. As it is a fault that developed after purchase.
S75 would be the way forward, but you really need to see what the company are prepared to offer. As should be covered under warranty.


https://www.mi.com/uk/support/faq/details/KA-07071/?srsltid=AfmBOoovGRlunjzphv4lhdzL43OhiE7Hl9jDsR23t6JpGiCll5jZOeM0

A_Geordie

screech_78 said:

If it’s over 30 days from purchase, you’re not entitled to a refund just yet.

The retailer has one opportunity to repair or replace, depending on what is most cost efficient for them. If after a repair or a replacement, a further fault develops, then you can use your final right to reject. If within 6 months of purchase, this would be a full refund. If after 6 months, a partial refund. 

Not quite correct but almost.

Firstly, the OP doesn't have to use the rights and remedies under the Consumer Rights Act and could instead make a claim for damage for breach of contract or some other action which could be an amount of compensation equivalent to a full refund. 

Second the right to repair or replacement is not down the to choice of the retailer as to what's most cost efficient to them. That is made clear in the Act when it says ... if the consumer requires the trader to repair or replace the goods, the trader must do so without significant inconvenience, within a reasonable time and bear the costs.

The trader can object to a repair or replacement but only if the required option is impossible or disproportionate to the other, and its up to the trader to prove that. In practice though, most consumers would probably not puruse it if the trader objected and just accept what was offered.

Leaving all of that aside, I have an inkling that Xiaomi Technology UK Limited might not be the party the OP needs to claim against. Software ownership is not necessarily the same  as the manufacturer of the goods and is likely to be another company within the group of companies. The android software may be licensed to Xiaomi Technology UK Limited by another affiliate, but did Xaomi Technology actually implement the software update that caused the device to be allegedly bricked? If they did not, then it's possible that could be a defence to any claim. 

Probably still worth taking a punt and claiming against Xiaomi Technology UK Limited and let them raise the issue.Come to think of it, I'm not even sure that the CRA is the correct law to rely on, digital content perhaps? 

Gaberdeen

born_again said:

Chargeback would not cover this. As it is a fault that developed after purchase.
S75 would be the way forward, but you really need to see what the company are prepared to offer. As should be covered under warranty.


https://www.mi.com/uk/support/faq/details/KA-07071/?srsltid=AfmBOoovGRlunjzphv4lhdzL43OhiE7Hl9jDsR23t6JpGiCll5jZOeM0

For the purposes of the Consumer Rights Act, if a fault develops within the first 6 months of ownership of a product, it is presumed that the fault existed prior to the sale occuring and the burden of proof is on the seller to prove otherwise. After 6 months, the burden of proof reverses.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

It's on that basis I've asked for remedy and on that basis I'd pursue a chargeback. But I take your point about the warranty period, I'm just not very confident in how these phones are going to behave going forward after developing such a critical fault so early in it's life.

born_again

Gaberdeen said:

born_again said:

Chargeback would not cover this. As it is a fault that developed after purchase.
S75 would be the way forward, but you really need to see what the company are prepared to offer. As should be covered under warranty.


https://www.mi.com/uk/support/faq/details/KA-07071/?srsltid=AfmBOoovGRlunjzphv4lhdzL43OhiE7Hl9jDsR23t6JpGiCll5jZOeM0

For the purposes of the Consumer Rights Act, if a fault develops within the first 6 months of ownership of a product, it is presumed that the fault existed prior to the sale occuring and the burden of proof is on the seller to prove otherwise. After 6 months, the burden of proof reverses.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

It's on that basis I've asked for remedy and on that basis I'd pursue a chargeback. But I take your point about the warranty period, I'm just not very confident in how these phones are going to behave going forward after developing such a critical fault so early in it's life.

Chargebacks have nothing to do with your consumer rights (that S75 where card provider is jointly and severally liable for breach of contract &/or misrepresentation) As chargebacks are over & above consumer rights & do not mirror them. They are card regulations set by Visa & Mastercard

What was the update that caused the issue?

Gaberdeen

born_again said:

Gaberdeen said:

born_again said:

Chargeback would not cover this. As it is a fault that developed after purchase.
S75 would be the way forward, but you really need to see what the company are prepared to offer. As should be covered under warranty.


https://www.mi.com/uk/support/faq/details/KA-07071/?srsltid=AfmBOoovGRlunjzphv4lhdzL43OhiE7Hl9jDsR23t6JpGiCll5jZOeM0

For the purposes of the Consumer Rights Act, if a fault develops within the first 6 months of ownership of a product, it is presumed that the fault existed prior to the sale occuring and the burden of proof is on the seller to prove otherwise. After 6 months, the burden of proof reverses.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

It's on that basis I've asked for remedy and on that basis I'd pursue a chargeback. But I take your point about the warranty period, I'm just not very confident in how these phones are going to behave going forward after developing such a critical fault so early in it's life.

Chargebacks have nothing to do with your consumer rights (that S75 where card provider is jointly and severally liable for breach of contract &/or misrepresentation) As chargebacks are over & above consumer rights & do not mirror them. They are card regulations set by Visa & Mastercard

What was the update that caused the issue?

The update was an OTA firmware update that couldn't be refused - the update was OS2.0.4.0.VOPEUXM and relates to the HyperOS version 2.

The download / installation was done overnight and the morning after there was "emergency calls only" where previously there had been carrier info as well as signal strength. Now, nothing.

After factory resetting the device I tried to re-download and install the same update again (as recommended by the forum), just in case there was a glitch in its application, but this did not fix the issue. Their community forum then suggested FASTBOOT'ing the phone to force an older OS onto it, however I'm not stupid - that would require unlocking the bootloader which would void the warranty.

I should add, I'm 100% au fait with technology, computers etc and I'm perfectly capable of doing anything technical with a phone or computer - but why should I need to do any of this for a phone that's 40-odd days old? I bought the phone for my OH to work first time out of the box, not to tinker with it.

WIFI still works, but lets be honest, what use is a phone that can't dial in or out?

After 40-odd days its completely unacceptable and for them to try and fob us off in saying there's no prospect of replacement or refund and it's that added intransigence towards this that makes me want to wash my hands of them completely and get a refund.

born_again

Can you not use WiFi calling on the phone then at home?

I agree it is unacceptable after 40 days, but this is the danger with software updates.
Sadly chargeback is not a way to sort the issue.
Even if you could do a faulty chargeback, you have to return the phone to them, via a tracked method. Which you can not claim for.
So best to see what they will do under warranty, which may end in a new or refurbished phone anyway 🤷‍♀️

DeathByFluffy

They're entitled to one attempt at repair (or may choose to replace / refund) - you have no rights to a refund just yet, regardless of your feelings towards the brand or that particular handset. 
Chargeback / S75 won't help either, as the retailer is offering to help - just you don't want the solution they've offered. 

Go with the exchange, see how the replacement is and go from there IMO.