Currys won't allow me to return item which I've tried

dj1471 wrote: »

That's likely to be a lot more hassle, as Currys will consider it faulty, likely send it away for "evaluation" then offer a replacement rather than a refund. If the product is simply not very good this doesn't help the OP at all.

Within the first 30 days the consumer is entitled to a refund if that is what they want, there is no obligation to accept a replacement. However, I think Currys would (correctly) view this with suspicion now due to the OPs previous contact with them.

BlueKenny85 wrote: »

Goods have to be of satisfactory quality, if it's not i.e sound quality is rubbish return it and stand your ground.

It entirely depends on the OPs expectations. For example, a £20 item is likely to be of lower quality compared to an item that costs 10 times as much. However, for £20 it could be argued that the sound it emits is satisfactory for the price.

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Just as Currys are entitled to make a reduction as per the post by Wealdroam.

Yes they are, as I agreed previously.

mije1983 wrote: »

Within the first 30 days the consumer is entitled to a refund if that is what they want

We all know what the OP is entitled to, we also know that Currys won't make getting a refund easy. I'm simply suggesting that a straight rejection will be a more straightforward route than claiming the item is faulty. Especially since it doesn't sound like it is faulty.

neilmcl wrote: »

Are you able to demo turntables at the Curry's store?

Some of the stores have some on display but very few have any records to try them with, they all get stolen.

We bought a turntable at the beginning of the year and we did a lot of shopping around, visiting stores like Currys and independent music shops and the ones Currys sell are the basic cheap quality ones with very tinny sound, at least that's all they had in store, in fact that's the most common type now they look like cute retro suitcases. Almost everywhere sells the Crosley and ION brands but they really are budget and entry level when it comes to turntables.

One of the biggest problems is the weight difference between modern and vintage records, the new budget ones don't have the weights and balancing to work well with both.

We originally had a £100 budget prepared to maybe go up to £150 at a push but after several weeks of research, trying them out in stores (taking our own records, one old one new) we ended up realising that we would never get a sound quality we were happy with at that level.

In the end we bought this https://m.richersounds.com/#!/product/PION-PL30

£100 more than our budget (we also got it in the January sale, a bit cheaper than currently selling) and doesn't have built in speakers, it should go to an amp but we blew more than our budget on the turntable so hooked it up to our soundbar instead. The sound is great, will be better when we add the amp and it plays all of our new and vintage records perfectly. You won't get anything with decent let alone good quality for less than £200 and there are some much better systems in to £300-£500 price range. Anything lower will be budget and losing quality.

On the other hand it seems a lot of people don't notice or don't care about poor sound quality, we witnessed loads of the cheap ones being bought while we were looking and have a few friends and relatives who have them and think they are great when to us they sound awful.

I know none of this helps OP with returning the one they have but will hopefully help a bit with choosing a replacement.

Sadly the more i read on the forum the more i despair........whatever happened to the sale and supply of goods act ? fit for a particular purpose...as described...merchantable quality ?

If a record player cannot play records to your satisfaction then surely its not fit for YOUR particular purpose.......

Guess i must be getting old this would never had stood even a few years ago....even more erosion of our rights what will become of us lol

For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

(b)appearance and finish,

(c)freedom from minor defects,

(d)safety, and

(e)durability.

(2C)The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—

(a)which is specifically drawn to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made,

(b)where the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or

(c)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.”

paweaz wrote: »

Sadly the more i read on the forum the more i despair........whatever happened to the sale and supply of goods act ? fit for a particular purpose...as described...merchantable quality ?

If a record player cannot play records to your satisfaction then surely its not fit for YOUR particular purpose.......

Guess i must be getting old this would never had stood even a few years ago....even more erosion of our rights what will become of us lol

For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

(b)appearance and finish,

(c)freedom from minor defects,

(d)safety, and

(e)durability.

(2C)The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—

(a)which is specifically drawn to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made,

(b)where the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or

(c)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.”

Sale of Goods Act and Supply of Goods and Services Act no longer applies to b2c contracts. The sections relating to consumer purchases were repealed and replaced by the Consumer Rights Act.

Fit for purpose....it only has to be fit for the purpose the goods are commonly supplied for unless you specifically make another purpose known to the trader in which case it needs to be fit for that purpose. However from what OP said, it did play records, just the sound quality wasn't to their expectations. So it was fit for purpose even if it may not be of satisfactory quality depending on the exact circumstances.

As for the part of the act you have quoted....you've missed a very important part:

(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.

Now those provisions were pretty much exactly transposed into the CRA. But as noted, sound quality is subjective - you wouldn't expect a £50 player to be as good as a £500 one.


Our consumer rights have not been eroded. While some changes were to the consumers detriment, the majority of them were to our benefit. For example under the old SoGA, you would have to rely on the trader agreeing you had rejected the goods within a reasonable time before you would be entitled to a refund - now its a blanket 30 days (which potentially lessens rights as "reasonable time" could be several months later - at least according to courts, you'd have been unlikely to find a retailer who would agree to it without a courts insistence though - but rejection periods like that were always an exception rather than the norm).

You now only have to give the retailer 1 attempt to repair or replace - after that, you have the right to reject for a refund again. While under the SoGA, there was no limit to the number of repairs/replacements a retailer could make and you would be reliant on a court agreeing the number of attempts had been unreasonable.

The retailer cannot make a deduction from your refund if its within the first six months after purchase (the exception is motor vehicles). While under the old SoGA, there was no time limitation placed on the reduction.

More importantly, it also gives rights for digital content - which didn't exist under SoGA at all as it only covered tangible goods.