Comet Help Refund

Blacksheep1979

well it's based on a couple of lawyer friends and what they've seen, so probably more accurate than your legal precedent setting career

poet123

What an articulate, well thought out reply.

FYI (although not at all relevant IMO) I too, have lawyer friends,and law student sons, oh and a close relative who is a Recorder,a visiting Prof at Oxford and a member of the Inns of Court. Those relationships do not however, imbue me with any legal knowledge,not so for you apparently.

My legal forays are at least factually based, and not just unsupported comments (as it is obvious yours are by your inability to provide supporting case law when asked to do so) comments designed(perhaps)to play devils advocate on a forum such as this.

Not helpful really,especially when helping people with problems is ,in the final analysis, the point of such forums.

zorber

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

7 days is more than reasonable to check wether something is working

Its widely accepted the around 28 days is a reasonable period of time,

In this case the potential fault has been diagnosed in less then 7 days. It certainly doesnt seem fit for purpose either.

Blacksheep1979

yawn - you seem to be making up more and more 'facts' to try back yourself up - something that isn't going to help people if they unwisely choose to believe your side of things and blindly stumble into legal proceedings. The act basically says you have a reasonable period in which to reject goods for not being fit - something that can generally be done in a couple of days max. As for durability and lifespan that is what is covered for up to six years and on this (not suitability) you have the option (at retailers discretion) of replacement, repair or if they can't do this then refund less fair usage.

Now the repair/replacement part of the act is also assuming that the fault was present at the time of sale - which obviously with your train of thought would mean that you could get a full refund at any point, again not true.

poet123

Lol,not making facts up but countering your arguments, and emulating you by bringing into it points which are irrelevant i.e friendships with lawyers means you know what you are talking about:rotfl:

However I have been reading your posts even if your focus has been to denigrate rather than read mine. Nowhere did I say that there was an unending time limit for a refund, merely that in the scheme of things any judge if asked to rule, would say that 28 days(or maybe longer, according to his discretion) was a reasonable timescale for a refund on an item such as a computer.

Fact..I have asked for and received a replacement on a computer which was approx 18 days old. I could have pressed for, and received a refund via my CC provider but I was otherwise happy with the spec of the PC and chose a replacement. I have had refunds under similar circs.

Therefore my comments stand,if you want a refund because you are not satisfied with the "Merchantable quality" of an item, press for one, as there is no definitive timescale for such a refund, and if it goes to court the judge will err on the side of the consumer.

That has been my personal experience ,not a scenario put forward to make it seem as if I have a grasp of consumer law,can you say the same?

if not, do not purport to know the nuances of the SOG, at best it is untried supposition,at worst, misleading claptrap

smcaul

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

that is the case but I think you'll find any judge will find that you will have accepted the goods long long before 28 days.

I am sure the Judge will bow to your superior knowledge of the law and then thank you for telling the rest of us just how they will settle a case!!!!!

And whilst you seem to be on a roll with your ESP, any chance of PM'ing me next weeks winning lottery numbers? :rotfl::rotfl:

smcaul

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

The act basically says you have a reasonable period in which to reject goods for not being fit - something that can generally be done in a couple of days max.

You seem to have overlooked the part where they specifically mention that if you were to purchase a pair of skis in the summer then you would not be expected to find a fault until the winter, and so are quite within your rights to then reject the goods!!! So your 1 or 2 days for acceptance is blown totally out of the water!!!

uktim29

Q4. I know I can demand my money back within a "reasonable time" but how long is that?
The law does not specify a precise time as it will vary for most sales contracts as all the factors need to be taken into account to be fair to all sides. The pair of everyday shoes may only have a few days before the period expires but a pair of skis, purchased in a Summer Sale, may be allowed a longer period by a court.

So about 3 days for shoes. I think a 7 days would then be completely reasonable to check a computer is working. 28 days would be taking the !!!! especially with an item you'd pay a lot for, you'd want to test it as soon as you get it.

"9 out of 10 cases a small claims court would give the benefit of the doubt to a consumer". This is not true. As mentioned above it will be a decision that is fair to all sides.

poet123

Being fair to all sides does not preclude giving the benefit of the doubt to the consumer. If it is a cut and dried case then obviously the result would be clear cut, if there was a grey area which the judge had doubts about then he would usually err on the side of the consumer.

A computer has many progs not all of which will have been tried within a 7 day period IMO.

uktim29

poet123 wrote: »

grey area which the judge had doubts about then he would usually err on the side of the consumer.

A computer has many progs not all of which will have been tried within a 7 day period IMO.

A judge has to make a balanced decision, they cannot take sides or "err" to one side, that is not what they are there for.

All you need to do to test to see if a computer is working is turn it on and see if the operating system loads, the monitor works & mouse, keyboard, printer etc. With any computer I've bought it's taken me less than an hour to do all that.