What ever happened to the ICE Fitter?

Tozer

Seems to me to be much ado about nothing.

Explain this one away against the overriding principle in the Civil Procedure Rules....

Good job its not trial by jury in this country or it would be a lost case already going by some of the responses!

Freddie_Snowbits

Tozer wrote: »

Good job its not trial by jury in this country or it would be a lost case already going by some of the responses!

I think the punishment should fit the crime! For MDB, this should be the minimum term of 4 years as chief fitting engineer for a car radio manufacturer!

The public should be told though which manufacturer!

grayme-m

You guys are all for it when mdb next comes back on; haven't you read the SOGA?

marleyboy

grayme-m wrote: »

You guys are all for it when mdb next comes back on; haven't you read the SOGA?

Have I just read 6 pages of thread about postage costs. Needless to say had the item been sent back, as in most businesses, a replaecement or refund would have already been solved (assuming it was faulty when purchased).

Any company relies on customer opinion, else they be short lived companies. It seems to be a case of jumping in a hole, and digging deeper in order to get out of it. I would have just took the thing back ages ago, and been happy with a refund/replacement PLUS the postage costs, which would have been inclusive had the product proved to be faulty when purchased, rather than trying to play for time.

I will be interested to see wether or not you get a refund, when you get it, rather than relying on your self knowledge of "I know my rights".

Good luck with it though, I hope it proves fruitful and worth all the effort in the end. (although I have my doubts).

mdbarber

marleyboy wrote: »

Have I just read 6 pages of thread about postage costs. Needless to say had the item been sent back, as in most businesses, a replaecement or refund would have already been solved (assuming it was faulty when purchased).

Any company relies on customer opinion, else they be short lived companies. It seems to be a case of jumping in a hole, and digging deeper in order to get out of it. I would have just took the thing back ages ago, and been happy with a refund/replacement PLUS the postage costs, which would have been inclusive had the product proved to be faulty when purchased, rather than trying to play for time.

I will be interested to see wether or not you get a refund, when you get it, rather than relying on your self knowledge of "I know my rights".

Good luck with it though, I hope it proves fruitful and worth all the effort in the end. (although I have my doubts).

Of course had I just sent the item back it would all be sorted now!! lol how silly of me!!, or I could be with no stereo, no money and facing a court action for unpaid testing fees!! umm I don't gamble even on odds of 1000:1
And if you read back through the other threads there is a lot more than 6 pages
This was whole episode was originally about postage costs (of £19 actually) and much more.
It was about a company that went to extraordinary lengths to put people off returning goods, faulty or not.
It was about a company who, despite the law, says I have to pay for the return of goods even when it was they who insisted I returned them.
Even when asked a simple question.
Will I be refunded return postage costs when you find the goods to be faulty" declined to answer with a yes instead tried to scare me off with quotes like
"95% of goods returned are not faulty"
"Current out of box failure rates are 0.4%"
Sort of contradictory info no?, thats what this episode was about.

Continued defiance of statute and many other unpleasant failures on their behalf lead me to suspect I was right all along and thank god I listened to trading standards and not the self proclaimed "experts" on here
Now its about taking interest on my money as the law does not allow me to do so, so I continue to publicise this companies penny pinching and downright immoral policies.
A few of the trolls seem to think this is a waste of time and effort, not really I am paid to sit in front of a computer for at least a couple of hours a day and I multi task well so no real effort is required on my behalf and those who are not interested need not read, simple really.
and a combined thread distinct ip reading of over 20,000
If only they had just exchanged the item back in Jan.

Tozer

In fairness, I think you will find there are a few experts on here and if you actually posted with a little less emotions and actually listened to constructive advice then you would find a lot more sympathy.

I seem to recall that you shouted me down when I tried to explain the overriding objective to you in measured terms. That's impolite in my view.

Freddie_Snowbits

mdbarber wrote: »

A few of the trolls seem to think this is a waste of time and effort

Bang on the nail pal!

mdbarber wrote: »

If only they had just exchanged the item back in Jan.

I can only refer to my post about the Mitre Block!
(Note I got the skirting down, as well as two pints of Old Spot, now al I need is a decent Chick!)

grayme-m

mdbarber wrote: »

Even when asked a simple question.
Will I be refunded return postage costs when you find the goods to be faulty" declined to answer with a yes instead tried to scare me off with quotes like
"95% of goods returned are not faulty"
"Current out of box failure rates are 0.4%"
Sort of contradictory info no?, thats what this episode was about.

If 4 in 1,000 items sold fail out of the box, and they receive 80 out of every 1,000 items sold back...

That doesn't seem that contradictory, but your post does sum up this episode for me.

I wonder how many people sue them out of every 1,000 items sold? :rotfl:

marleyboy

mdbarber wrote: »

Of course had I just sent the item back it would all be sorted now!! lol how silly of me!!, or I could be with no stereo, no money and facing a court action for unpaid testing fees!! umm I don't gamble even on odds of 1000:1
And if you read back through the other threads there is a lot more than 6 pages
This was whole episode was originally about postage costs (of £19 actually) and much more.
It was about a company that went to extraordinary lengths to put people off returning goods, faulty or not.
It was about a company who, despite the law, says I have to pay for the return of goods even when it was they who insisted I returned them.
Even when asked a simple question.
Will I be refunded return postage costs when you find the goods to be faulty" declined to answer with a yes instead tried to scare me off with quotes like
"95% of goods returned are not faulty"
"Current out of box failure rates are 0.4%"
Sort of contradictory info no?, thats what this episode was about.

Continued defiance of statute and many other unpleasant failures on their behalf lead me to suspect I was right all along and thank god I listened to trading standards and not the self proclaimed "experts" on here
Now its about taking interest on my money as the law does not allow me to do so, so I continue to publicise this companies penny pinching and downright immoral policies.
A few of the trolls seem to think this is a waste of time and effort, not really I am paid to sit in front of a computer for at least a couple of hours a day and I multi task well so no real effort is required on my behalf and those who are not interested need not read, simple really.
and a combined thread distinct ip reading of over 20,000
If only they had just exchanged the item back in Jan.

I see by your reply what the problem is here, put simply, its your attitude, its no wonder the company has decided to let a court handle it and basically told you where to go.

Your arrogance will (or has) already proved your downfall. Should you win your case , you are free to gloat about the "expert advice", should you lose, all you have left is the egg on your face.

Should you not want advice on MSE, its probably best not to ask for it. Everyone seems to have held patience quite gracefully on here for you, and all you seem to be doing is spitting at them for it.

No company in their right mind is going to just give you the money, and let you keep the items on trust that YOU will send it off when you get paid, its not good for any business to rely on a customers "trust" and postage costs are refundable if proved the item was faulty on purchase.

Companies rely on reputation, ive seen many rip off merciants crumble on MSE, because they didnt anticipate that Joe Public speak louder than words. A case of Goliath v Jason with MSE. However, having not seen many people on this forum with similar stories about this company, your opinion on the company remains just that.

Still out of politeness "note the word", I wish you good luck in your case. I look forward to hearing the final outcome of the case. Which I suspect should you lose, we all probably wont hear.

stugib

marleyboy wrote: »

its no wonder the company has decided to let a court handle it and basically told you where to go.

Your arrogance will (or has) already proved your downfall.

My prediction would be that the court will be none too pleased that he's not made the effort to resolve it sensibly and is using the court to prove a point rather than sort it out the quickest way.

I'd imagine, if the SCC can make this sort of judgement, he'll get awarded his refund and postage costs but have to pay both parties legal expenses.