Section 75 is a washout. What on earth can I do now??

MattMattMattUK

[Deleted User] said:

MattMattMattUK said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

The FOS will not accept your claim, you would either need to wait eight weeks or get a deadlock letter from your bank to be able to do that. I also think at the current point they are totally right to reject your S75 request. You need to be a little bit more realistic, it is the festive period, couriers are overloaded, it will get resolved but it might take a little longer than usual.

You can either throw your toys out of the pram and it will get sorted in the new year, or you can be rational about it and it will get sorted in the year, the only difference between the two options is your blood pressure.

Legally right? I don't think so from what I've read. Morally right? Again, I don't think so. 

Yes, the law has provision for reasonableness, the supplier are doing their best based on current circumstances. The eight weeks/deadlock letter is however fixed in regulations and then the FOS has around a six month wait for decisions at the moment, so if you want to take that route be aware of the timescales involved.

[Deleted User] said:
I feel more upset than wishing to throw any toys out of the pram. I wanted to play all those games that I couldn't play on my recently deceased 13 year old PC. I'm now using a laptop and the speed of it running spreadsheets and the like is glacial. So this is not a question of me being unreasonable, especially when we consider I've been without my new PC for a fortnight now, and God only knows how much longer I'll need to wait. 

So will a few more weeks really matter? Considering that the consensus on here seems to be that you are being unreasonable it would seem that on the balance of probability you are. I have built my own PCs for twenty five years, sometimes components fail, sometimes they do not work, regardless of that or any other purchase expecting things to move quickly at the busiest time of the year is unrealistic, your choice is to accept they or not, but you accepting it will not change the speed of resolution, not will it change the way that S75 or the FOS operates.

[Deleted User]

MattMattMattUK said:

[Deleted User] said:

MattMattMattUK said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

The FOS will not accept your claim, you would either need to wait eight weeks or get a deadlock letter from your bank to be able to do that. I also think at the current point they are totally right to reject your S75 request. You need to be a little bit more realistic, it is the festive period, couriers are overloaded, it will get resolved but it might take a little longer than usual.

You can either throw your toys out of the pram and it will get sorted in the new year, or you can be rational about it and it will get sorted in the year, the only difference between the two options is your blood pressure.

Legally right? I don't think so from what I've read. Morally right? Again, I don't think so. 

Yes, the law has provision for reasonableness, the supplier are doing their best based on current circumstances. The eight weeks/deadlock letter is however fixed in regulations and then the FOS has around a six month wait for decisions at the moment, so if you want to take that route be aware of the timescales involved.

[Deleted User] said:
I feel more upset than wishing to throw any toys out of the pram. I wanted to play all those games that I couldn't play on my recently deceased 13 year old PC. I'm now using a laptop and the speed of it running spreadsheets and the like is glacial. So this is not a question of me being unreasonable, especially when we consider I've been without my new PC for a fortnight now, and God only knows how much longer I'll need to wait. 

So will a few more weeks really matter? Considering that the consensus on here seems to be that you are being unreasonable it would seem that on the balance of probability you are. I have built my own PCs for twenty five years, sometimes components fail, sometimes they do not work, regardless of that or any other purchase expecting things to move quickly at the busiest time of the year is unrealistic, your choice is to accept they or not, but you accepting it will not change the speed of resolution, not will it change the way that S75 or the FOS operates.

Don't forget the phenomenal ever-increasing rise in prices. So it's not just impatience (though that is a small factor) If I just get a replacement, then OK. But if I got refunded by the same amount I paid a month ago and I buy a new PC with it, my PC will be noticeably inferior. So I would imagine these people wouldn't regard it as being unreasonable if they were out of pocket for £hundreds. But still, people are now convincing me that just getting Chillblast to replace it will be OK, so...

MattMattMattUK

[Deleted User] said:

MattMattMattUK said:

[Deleted User] said:

MattMattMattUK said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

The FOS will not accept your claim, you would either need to wait eight weeks or get a deadlock letter from your bank to be able to do that. I also think at the current point they are totally right to reject your S75 request. You need to be a little bit more realistic, it is the festive period, couriers are overloaded, it will get resolved but it might take a little longer than usual.

You can either throw your toys out of the pram and it will get sorted in the new year, or you can be rational about it and it will get sorted in the year, the only difference between the two options is your blood pressure.

Legally right? I don't think so from what I've read. Morally right? Again, I don't think so. 

Yes, the law has provision for reasonableness, the supplier are doing their best based on current circumstances. The eight weeks/deadlock letter is however fixed in regulations and then the FOS has around a six month wait for decisions at the moment, so if you want to take that route be aware of the timescales involved.

[Deleted User] said:
I feel more upset than wishing to throw any toys out of the pram. I wanted to play all those games that I couldn't play on my recently deceased 13 year old PC. I'm now using a laptop and the speed of it running spreadsheets and the like is glacial. So this is not a question of me being unreasonable, especially when we consider I've been without my new PC for a fortnight now, and God only knows how much longer I'll need to wait. 

So will a few more weeks really matter? Considering that the consensus on here seems to be that you are being unreasonable it would seem that on the balance of probability you are. I have built my own PCs for twenty five years, sometimes components fail, sometimes they do not work, regardless of that or any other purchase expecting things to move quickly at the busiest time of the year is unrealistic, your choice is to accept they or not, but you accepting it will not change the speed of resolution, not will it change the way that S75 or the FOS operates.

Don't forget the phenomenal ever-increasing rise in prices. So it's not just impatience (though that is a small factor) If I just get a replacement, then OK. But if I got refunded by the same amount I paid a month ago and I buy a new PC with it, my PC will be noticeably inferior. So I would imagine these people wouldn't regard it as being unreasonable if they were out of pocket for £hundreds. But still, people are now convincing me that just getting Chillblast to replace it will be OK, so...

If you are worried about pricing then just ask them to repair/replace, they will either switch out the component with the issue or just replace the whole system. Once they have it back they will sort that out fairly quickly once they have the original back.

born_again

[Deleted User] said:

born_again said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

1st you would need to go through Capital one complaints, before you can go to FOS one they have either issued a deadlock letter or 8 weeks have passed.

I can see Cap One point, you have had a PC less than a month & have not given the retailer chance to fix it.

S75 is never a quick process. 

Why do you think a retailer should refund before they have the item back & checked if it is faulty?

I'm just going by what I understand the legal position to be; namely if a newly bought product becomes dysfunctional within 30 days then the person who purchased it has the right for it be repaired/replaced/refunded without undue delay and within 14 days.  And that hasn't happened in my case. I do not recollect an exception to this rule being made for the Christmas period. 

I don't think the person at Capital One can have read anything I've said, or if he has he has not comprehended it. 

You have to understand that the person dealing may have zero knowledge on PC's & how they work.
I work with people that struggle with word & emails. which is part & parcel of the role.
Refund is from when received back.

While I understand your frustration. It is only 13 days from your reporting  the fault to the retailer. There is no undue delay here. 
No matter which way you go now, new year is going to be when anything happens.

Grumpy_chap

The OP might benefit from some patience here as the timelines really do not seem to have been excessive, particularly given that the supplier has attempted to make the collection of the faulty PC but, unfortunately, unsuccessful collections.

The PC might be easily repaired if the manufacturer can identify a faulty component that can be replaced.

If the PC cannot be fixed, then a refund would be the only option available to the OP.  I note the comments about the price of the same / equivalent PC increasing in the run-up to Christmas.  The price might be lower in the January sales.

MattMattMattUK

Grumpy_chap said:

The OP might benefit from some patience here as the timelines really do not seem to have been excessive, particularly given that the supplier has attempted to make the collection of the faulty PC but, unfortunately, unsuccessful collections.

The PC might be easily repaired if the manufacturer can identify a faulty component that can be replaced.

If the PC cannot be fixed, then a refund would be the only option available to the OP. 

Chillblast have a fairly good reputation, they would likely also offer to replace.

Grumpy_chap said:

I note the comments about the price of the same / equivalent PC increasing in the run-up to Christmas.  The price might be lower in the January sales.

Being the geek that I am I can add in that would rarely happen with this segment of the gaming PC market. Also there is a weird situation with RAM prices at the moment, as an example the £200 of RAM I put in my PC in Feb would now cost over £600, prices have now largely stabilised but there is very unlikely to be any kind of genuine discounts on the January sales.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

If you exercise the short term right to reject the retailer needs to refund within 14 days of agreeing a refund is due. 

This is matter of fact and must be established without undue delay. 

The burden of proof is upon yourself (for short term right to reject) so if you have provided them with such that the goods do not conform their issues in collecting do not extend their timeframe for refunding.

Credit provider is jointly liable, you can either talk to customer services, raise an official complaint or send a letter before action. The middle option would be my starting point for any Section 75 claim with any provider. 

Regarding the increase in prices, you can claim damages due to a breach of contract, they need to flow naturally from the breach and be foreseeable at the time the contract was formed. 

The above is very general advice of how it all works, where you wish to go is up to you.  

A repair by the retailer saves you seeking any damages for buying similar spec at a higher price so it may be pragmatic, and perhaps a friendly approach to the retailer would see some goodwill of something extra thrown in addition to the repair, but your rights are your rights as above. 

Alderbank

[Deleted User] said:

born_again said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

1st you would need to go through Capital one complaints, before you can go to FOS one they have either issued a deadlock letter or 8 weeks have passed.

I can see Cap One point, you have had a PC less than a month & have not given the retailer chance to fix it.

S75 is never a quick process. 

Why do you think a retailer should refund before they have the item back & checked if it is faulty?

I'm just going by what I understand the legal position to be; namely if a newly bought product becomes dysfunctional within 30 days then the person who purchased it has the right for it be repaired/replaced/refunded without undue delay and within 14 days.  And that hasn't happened in my case. I do not recollect an exception to this rule being made for the Christmas period. 

I don't think the person at Capital One can have read anything I've said, or if he has he has not comprehended it. 

If that's what you understand then you don't understand the legal position.

When and why the goods become 'dysfunctional' is key.

The legal position is that if the goods do not conform to contract at the point of sale then you have the right under section 20 of the CRA (short term right to reject) to reject the goods and treat the contract as at an end.

You must indicate to the trader that the contract is at an end. That can be something you say or do, but it must be clear enough to be understood by the trader.

Did you do that?

The consumer right to cancel the contract only exists if the goods do not conform at the point of sale; the right does not exist if the goods became dysfunctional after the point of sale, for example such as because the unit was dropped on the floor or the ventilation was impaired causing the chips to overheat, .

A refund under section 20 must be given without undue delay, and in any event within 14 days beginning with the day on which the trader agrees that the consumer is entitled to a refund.

Has the trader agreed that? Since the unit was not DOA it is reasonable that they will need to inspect it first.

'Undue delay' is subject to a reasonableness test. That test will take the Christmas period into account both for the trader's engineering staff and any couriers they use.

dumpster_fire2025

Ergates said:

[Deleted User] said:

Ergates said:

[Deleted User] said:

eskbanker said:

[Deleted User] said:

But when I got a response from Capital One, I just stared at the email in disbelief. The individual said:

"After reviewing the information you have provided to date, we need some further information to help us progress our investigation and establish whether we can help you with your claim.
As per visa terms and conditions goods should be return to the merchant. so please return the goods to the merchant". 

That response indicates that they're treating it as a chargeback claim rather than a s75 one, which is common practice among card providers, as it's to their advantage to do so, even though the customer has the statutory right to claim under section 75.

I can understand why you're frustrated at what you consider to be "outrageous delays", but realistically escalation to card provider or FOS or CAB, or anybody else, is highly unlikely to expedite matters so concentrating on the retailer will be more productive IMHO - the Consumer Rights Act (20(15)) does require a retailer to refund within 14 days of agreeing that the consumer is entitled to one.

The problem with accepting a replacement from Chillblast is the fact that the PC effectively became dysfunctional after just 11 days suggests their quality control is not ideal. Also, perhaps it is the combination of hardware that precipitated the fault.

Not really, that would depend entirely on what the fault is.

If the problem is caused by a fault in the build, then yes.

If it is caused by a failing component, then no.  Chillblast don't make the components, and any part that worked for 11 days after purchase would have passed any testing performed on it.

Well, you probably know more than I do. I thought there might be an incompatibility between something like the motherboard on the one hand, and RAM, CPU or whatever on the other?  But if the fault is related to my specific PC and not to that model, then getting a replacement would be OK. But that wouldn't stop my nervousness when I get my replacement! 

Whilst specific motherboards are only compatible with certain CPU, it isn't possible to fit an incompatible one - it won't physically fit (i.e. you simply cannot fit a Ryzen CPU into a motherboard designed for an Intel CPU).

Similarly with RAM - you physically can't put DDR3 RAM into a DDR4 slot (etc).

Other than that - if if fits, it should be OK.  I'd say it's most likely a failed component.

Motherboards may only support certain brands of RAM in certain configurations to get certain speeds, but it's important to note that that won't cause them to fail, they will just run a stock speeds (which will be a lot slower than they should run at.)

But yeah, as others have said, if it booted for a week and a half and then failed, it's a hardware failure, not a configuration issue.

[Deleted User]

Alderbank said:

[Deleted User] said:

born_again said:

[Deleted User] said:

I'm unable to proceed with the section 75 claim as Chillblast has still not collected my PC. So I think my next step is to contact the financial ombudsmen service? (can't link unfortunately) 

1st you would need to go through Capital one complaints, before you can go to FOS one they have either issued a deadlock letter or 8 weeks have passed.

I can see Cap One point, you have had a PC less than a month & have not given the retailer chance to fix it.

S75 is never a quick process. 

Why do you think a retailer should refund before they have the item back & checked if it is faulty?

I'm just going by what I understand the legal position to be; namely if a newly bought product becomes dysfunctional within 30 days then the person who purchased it has the right for it be repaired/replaced/refunded without undue delay and within 14 days.  And that hasn't happened in my case. I do not recollect an exception to this rule being made for the Christmas period. 

I don't think the person at Capital One can have read anything I've said, or if he has he has not comprehended it. 

If that's what you understand then you don't understand the legal position.

When and why the goods become 'dysfunctional' is key.

The legal position is that if the goods do not conform to contract at the point of sale then you have the right under section 20 of the CRA (short term right to reject) to reject the goods and treat the contract as at an end.

You must indicate to the trader that the contract is at an end. That can be something you say or do, but it must be clear enough to be understood by the trader.

Did you do that?

The consumer right to cancel the contract only exists if the goods do not conform at the point of sale; the right does not exist if the goods became dysfunctional after the point of sale, for example such as because the unit was dropped on the floor or the ventilation was impaired causing the chips to overheat, .

A refund under section 20 must be given without undue delay, and in any event within 14 days beginning with the day on which the trader agrees that the consumer is entitled to a refund.

Has the trader agreed that? Since the unit was not DOA it is reasonable that they will need to inspect it first.

'Undue delay' is subject to a reasonableness test. That test will take the Christmas period into account both for the trader's engineering staff and any couriers they use.

I have no idea why you think this.  Even if a fault develops with 6 months (vastly longer than 30 days) it is presumed that the fault was always there since purchasing, or at least latently there at the time of purchase. And regardless of the law, the word reasonable here is not appropriate.