hearing aid returns

Ergates

I'd say not like that - as everything is still fully returnable until the hygiene seal is breached.

I've seen some advisory pages say that the retailer must to inform the customer that breaching the hygiene seal voids their right to cancel the contract - but I can't find that in the actual legislation (though I'm happy to be corrected if someone can find it).

eskbanker

I contacted the company and asked for them to be returned under their 30 day trial

Our 45-Day Better Hearing Guarantee is a voluntary commercial policy that goes further than UK consumer law requires. It was designed to give customers a genuine opportunity to trial the hearing aids and, where no improvement in hearing is experienced after a fair trial, to request a return.

As above, it appears that statutory rights may not come to OP's rescue here, but OP and the company clearly have different perceptions on what was offered over and above consumer protection legislation. It would seem likely that the company knows its terms better than customers but it's not unheard of for this not to be the case - is OP under the impression that there is/was some sort of 'no quibble' trial, and if so, what documentary support is there for this view?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82048906#Comment_82048906

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/schedule/2

(o)where under regulation 28, 36 or 37 there is no right to cancel or the right to cancel may be lost, the information that the consumer will not benefit from a right to cancel, or the circumstances under which the consumer loses the right to cancel;

They are is indeed 🙂 Without it the consume isn't bound by the contract, although we never found out what that means either.

I've never even seen a hearing aid up close so I have no idea what they actually are (I know what they do and look like but not what they are made of) but the EU mattress case would also suggest if the thing can be sterilised then the limit doesn't apply anyway (and the cost of this can't be deducted if the information requirements aren't met).

Alderbank

The information about unsealed medical goods is in s28.

The essential information which must be supplied to conform with CCR is listed in Schedule 2.

Schedule 2(o) says that must include 'where under regulation 28…the right to cancel may be lost, …the circumstances under which the consumer loses the right to cancel.'

So the trader must state the circumstances under which the consumer loses the right to cancel under s28, such as opening the sealed cellophane pack.

We don't know whether the trader did supply this information, which is typically supplied either by email when confirming the sale or as a printed document included with the product, to comply with the CCR regs. However the trader does seem to be very well versed in consumer law.

TELLIT01

I got caught by the same company I suspect. I couldn't get the hearing aid into one ear because of the shape of the ear canal. They initially refused any refund because I had used it. I finally got about £40 as a 'good will gesture'. It's not a genuine 30 day free trial in my view as you have to try them to see if they work and they then claim that the distance selling rules don't apply because of hygiene.

Okell

What are the terms of this "free" trial?

If you can't "trial" them without using them I would have thought it would be misleading if you can't then get a full refund if you don't get on with them.

Is this really a cancellation question under the CCRs or is it really a claim that should be based on the "free trial" terms?

Alderbank

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82049250#Comment_82049250

Good questions.

Their website lays it on with a trowel about the significant differences between their Better Hearing Guarantee and regulation 28 of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regs, very clearly and accurately in my opinion.

Here are a couple of example pages, they are in big print on their website:

https://trysmarthearing.co.uk/pages/refund-policy

Okell

@Alderbank - thanks

reading the linked refund policy is interesting.

they actually talk about sanitising used returned hearing aids for resale.

they can't on the one hand say they can resell them after sanitising and at the same time say they can't be cancelled for hygiene reasons. it's either one or the other

they also misrepresent the statutory right to cancel by saying goods must be returned within 14 days. i don't think so…

does that mean

1 the contract can be cancelled because the seller has admitted that used hearing aids can be "sanitised" and resold, and

2 they can't make a deduction for loss of value because they haven't complied with the cancellation information requirments/have misrepresented cancellation rights?

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82049285#Comment_82049285

IMHO the mention of sanitising for resale isn't some sort of 'admission' that weakens their invocation of CCRs 28.3.a, which doesn't require any sort of evidence that opened goods have become irrevocably useless?

Their diminished value reduction provision seems pointless if they're disallowing CCR returns after wear anyway, so is potentially some sort of orphan clause that's survived document updates but can't actually be triggered?

sheramber

What kind of hearing aids are they?

behind the ear with a small flexible dome that goes in the ear

Or. are they in ear hearing aids?