Rights on faulty goods with receipt

sd123

I know I'm right in saying that if a product bought at a shop is faulty, and is brought back with receipt that the customer is entitled to a repair/replacement/refund.
Q.
1. is it at the consumer's discretion to ask for which one they want, ie, if the shop offers a repair, can the consumer insist on a full refund?
2. By refund, does it necessary mean cash, or just as good? ie. give you the money back or refund your credit/debit card? If they offer you credit note, can you insist on cash refund?
3. if the product has absoloutly no packaging/barcode/label etc on it to show that you bought it there, and you have the receipt with genuine fault, do the store still have to take it back, giving you repair/replacement/refund at your discretion?
4. if a manager tries to shift the blame saying that they have to send it back to manufacturer or whatever can they be reported for trying to do this, as the sale was made between you and the store, and as far as you're concerned, you couldn't care about the manufacturer?
5.also, how long do you have to bring the product back? eg. if the clothes were worn and ripped from your own fault, can you say it was like that when bought if you have the receipt?
Thanks in advance!!

Sam Vimes

1. is it at the consumer's discretion to ask for which one they want, ie, if the shop offers a repair, can the consumer insist on a full refund?


it's at the shop's discretion. if you're not happy with their remedy, you can take them to the small claims court

2. By refund, does it necessary mean cash, or just as good? ie. give you the money back or refund your credit/debit card? If they offer you credit note, can you insist on cash refund?


i'm not 100% sure on this but i'd say you have to accept a credit note. it's basically the same as a replacement except you get the replacement at your convenience. but there might be something in law that says otherwise and of course there's always the small claims court


3. if the product has absoloutly no packaging/barcode/label etc on it to show that you bought it there, and you have the receipt with genuine fault, do the store still have to take it back, giving you repair/replacement/refund at your discretion?


yes (except for the "your discretion" bit). the packaging would be the same regardless of where you bought it anyway and proves nothing. generally in such a case a shop would take a replacement out of a box and just give you the unit, keeping the packaging, or just send the unit off for repair



4. if a manager tries to shift the blame saying that they have to send it back to manufacturer or whatever can they be reported for trying to do this, as the sale was made between you and the store, and as far as you're concerned, you couldn't care about the manufacturer?


they cannot tell you to go to the manufacturer if the product is in warranty. outside the warranty they can



5.also, how long do you have to bring the product back? eg. if the clothes were worn and ripped from your own fault, can you say it was like that when bought if you have the receipt?
Thanks in advance!!

if you're talking about getting a full refund, that's up to the individual shop's policy. otherwise, there is no hard rule here. you could have bought the product 20 minutes ago and if it looks like you did the damage yourself they can refuse to do anything for you.

also,

You have no grounds for redress if
* You examined the item before you bought it and should have seen the defect

if it was extremely obvious that the product had a fault when you bought it, it's taken that you accepted it in that condition and aren't entitled to anything

have a read of this page:
http://citizensinformation.ie/categories/consumer-affairs/consumer-protection/consumer-rights/consumers_and_the_law_in_ireland

mickoneill30

Sam Vimes wrote: »

it's at the shop's discretion. if you're not happy with their remedy, you can take them to the small claims court

It's at the shops discretion only if it's been a while since you bought the item. If you buy an item today and it goes faulty next week then you can request a refund (in cash). If it goes faulty in a couple of months then it's up to the shop, they have to offer one of repair, replace, refund. If they can't repair or replace they have to refund (they can offer you a credit note but you don't have to accept it).
http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Get_Your_Rights/Shopping/Vouchers,_Credit_Notes/What%20To%20Do.html

If the shop offers a repair / replace or refund then taking them to the small claims court isn't going to help you much (unless you bought it last week and they won't refund you after it went faulty).

Also for returning ripped clothes. If you purchase something that is faulty or ripped and you wait too long to return it you may lose your right to reject the goods as it may appear you have accepted the goods.

http://www.consumerassociation.ie/rights.html

Sam Vimes

mickoneill30 wrote: »

It's at the shops discretion only if it's been a while since you bought the item. If you buy an item today and it goes faulty next week then you can request a refund (in cash). If it goes faulty in a couple of months then it's up to the shop.

that's generally store policy but there's nothing in law about it

cgarvey

mickoneill30 wrote: »

If you buy an item today and it goes faulty next week then you can request a refund (in cash). If it goes faulty in a couple of months then it's up to the shop.

Link?

mickoneill30

If they break within a week I'd assume that they're not of merchantable quality. I'd expect most items to last more than a couple of weeks. So do the shops generally.
If they break within a few months then it's just one of those things and then it's up to the shop to figure out how to proceed.

Does that not sound correct to you?

"If goods are not of merchantable quality, you do not have to accept a repair. You can insist on a refund or a replacement. "

http://thecai.ie/rights_retailers.html#exchange


and

"Goods must be of merchantable quality – goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what they are meant to do, their durability and their price "

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/consumer-affairs/consumer-protection/consumer-rights/consumers_and_the_law_in_ireland

Edit: It's crap that all this info is spread out around different websites. Can they not get it altogether to make it easy for the consumer. It's like they want it to be confusing on purpose.

Nody

cgarvey wrote: »

Link?

Stickies are your friend:

Your rights when things go wrong

If goods are not of merchantable quality or are not fit for their purpose or are not as described the consumer is entitled to a remedy.

If the reason for the complaint is not trivial and is discovered soon after purchase, the consumer is entitled to reject the goods and insist on a full refund provided prompt action is action is taken.

If the goods have been used for some time, or if there is undue delay in making the complaint, or if there is reason to believe that the goods have been accepted, the consumer's entitlement, at best, may be to a repair or to a partial refund.

There are no hard and fast rules as each case has to be considered on its merits.

axer

Sam Vimes wrote: »

i'm not 100% sure on this but i'd say you have to accept a credit note. it's basically the same as a replacement except you get the replacement at your convenience. but there might be something in law that says otherwise and of course there's always the small claims court

You don't have to accept a credit note instead of a refund. You are entitled to get refunded the way your paid e.g. credit card, cash etc. Cash is always acceptable though.

3. if the product has absoloutly no packaging/barcode/label etc on it to show that you bought it there, and you have the receipt with genuine fault, do the store still have to take it back, giving you repair/replacement/refund at your discretion?

If the product is faulty then they cannot demand all the packaging etc. If they are replacing the item for you where you have no rights (e.g. you picked wrong colour etc) then they can demand all that.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

4. if a manager tries to shift the blame saying that they have to send it back to manufacturer or whatever can they be reported for trying to do this, as the sale was made between you and the store, and as far as you're concerned, you couldn't care about the manufacturer?


they cannot tell you to go to the manufacturer if the product is in warranty. outside the warranty they can

It doesn't matter whether the item is still in warranty or not since warranty does not matter at all. The contract is with the seller and the seller only. You can choose to acknowledge the manufacturer if you want but you do not have to - ever.

Sam Vimes

mickoneill30 wrote: »

"If goods are not of merchantable quality, you do not have to accept a repair. You can insist on a refund or a replacement. "

that's a very odd concept to me. if something is of merchantable quality, then it does what it's supposed to do. why on earth would someone want something repaired if there's nothing wrong with it

that seems to be saying that you never have to accept a repair


unless it means that repairing the item won't work because it doesn't do what it's supposed to do even if it's in full working order? that would make more sense to me. in that case a repair would not be applicable to the item. for example, no how much you repair a toaster it won't cook a turkey because it's not designed to

Sam Vimes

axer wrote: »

You don't have to accept a credit note instead of a refund. You are entitled to get refunded the way your paid e.g. credit card, cash etc. Cash is always acceptable though.

that's what i thought but the site i linked to seemed to suggest otherwise. you seem to be thinking of a credit note as the same as a refund in that you get refunded the same way you paid but a credit note is not a refund. it's more comparable to a replacement because you end up with a product from the shop.

you're right in that you don't have to accept a credit note instead of a refund but in a case where you're not entitled to a refund, you might have to accept a credit note instead of a replacement or repair

axer wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether the item is still in warranty or not since warranty does not matter at all. The contract is with the seller and the seller only. You can choose to acknowledge the manufacturer if you want but you do not have to - ever.

the contract is with the seller but there comes a stage where the seller doesn't have to help you anymore because the product is too old or because of customer damage or some such reason. i suppose it's not so much telling you to go to the manufacturer as telling you they don't have to do anything anymore and mentioning that the manufacturer might do something for them

mickoneill30

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you're right in that you don't have to accept a credit note instead of a refund but in a case where you're not entitled to a refund, you might have to accept a credit note instead of a replacement or repair

Wrong. It's repair / replacement / refund. If they can't offer the first two they must offer the third. That's in the links I provided above. http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Get_Your_Rights/Shopping/Vouchers,_Credit_Notes/What%20To%20Do.html

You buy your toaster. They can't repair or replace it. You still need a toaster. What's the point of getting a credit note for the shop that can't replace it. You've got to go to another shop and pay for a toaster. So now you've got a credit note you don't need or want. Toaster is here as an example obviously. I don't know if it can cook turkeys

Edit: Ignore that. You're right. If your not entitled to a refund or repair or replacement then getting a credit note is a bonus.

I don't understand your post above about the merchantable quality bit.

Sam Vimes

mickoneill30 wrote: »

Wrong. It's repair / replacement / refund. If they can't offer the first two they must offer the third. That's in the links I provided above. http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Get_Your_Rights/Shopping/Vouchers,_Credit_Notes/What%20To%20Do.html

i don't think you fully understood my post. the above sentence in no way conflicts with what i said

edit: i see you realised

mickoneill30 wrote: »

You buy your toaster. They can't repair or replace it. You still need a toaster. What's the point of getting a credit note for the shop that can't replace it. You've got to go to another shop and pay for a toaster. So now you've got a credit note you don't need or want. Toaster is here as an example obviously. I don't know if it can cook turkeys

I don't understand your post above about the merchantable quality bit.

exactly. i was saying that in that case you'd be entitled to a refund because a repair or replacement isn't applicable to the situation

to explain what i said about merchantable quality, there are two possible definitions of it that i can see, which are easier to explain when you think of lack of it:

1. doesn't do what it's supposed to do because it's faulty

2. doesn't do what it's supposed to do because the product cannot do the thing that it was advertised as being able to do

in the first case, a repair is acceptable because after a repair, it will be of merchantable quality

in the second case, neither repair or replacement are applicable because the item can't do the advertised task. of course the shop could still replace with a different model that actually does the advertised task

for example: someone buys a phone advertised as having bluetooth and it turns out the item was mislabelled. it can't be repaired because repairing won't give it bluetooth but it can be replaced with a different model that does have bluetooth. but if this model is lacking in some other way, then the customer doesn't have to accept it

mickoneill30

Sam Vimes wrote: »

1. doesn't do what it's supposed to do because it's faulty

And there are two situations where it does this.

1: Just after you buy it (from 5 minutes to about 4 weeks)
I've never had a retailer not replace / refund an item in that situation. Who would accept a repair of an item (which might take weeks) that you bought yesterday when there are 10 of them sitting on the retailers shelves?

In your bluetooth example above suppose the phone did have bluetooth but it just wasn't working and it took the purchaser 4 days to figure that out. That's not merchantable quality. Yes a repair will fix it but it's a new item that never worked. Most people won't wait (and shops don't expect you to wait) for 10 days while the phone heads off to the manufacturer.

2: After a reasonable period of time.
Then it's a repair / replacement / refund.


It's worded craply and it shouldn't be open to interpretation. I've no idea why it's obscure but how hard would it be for the consumer associations or government to make it a law that if something goes faulty in the first 4 weeks through no fault of the consumer then it's repair / replace / refund at the consumers request and at any time after that let the retailer decide which of the 3 to do.

Doctor DooM

mickoneill30 wrote: »

And there are two situations where it does this.

1: Just after you buy it (from 5 minutes to about 4 weeks)
I've never had a retailer not replace / refund an item in that situation. Who would accept a repair of an item (which might take weeks) that you bought yesterday when there are 10 of them sitting on the retailers shelves?

2: After a reasonable period of time.
Then it's a repair / replacement / refund.

It's worded craply and it shouldn't be open to interpretation. I've no idea why it's obscure but how hard would it be for the consumer associations or government to make it a law that if something goes faulty in the first 4 weeks through no fault of the consumer then it's repair / replace / refund at the consumers request and at any time after that let the retailer decide which of the 3 to do.

This is very true. In reality, you can play with words as much as you want, but if goods are faulty, and the retailer does not wish to give a refund but will offer every other solution, I hear it is quite difficult to get the refund.

Having worked with electronics I certainly never handed out a refund for a first week fault, unless the manufacturer had some kind of special remedy in place (Which some companies do, and should be appluaded for such.)

Just to clarify a customer never has to accept a credit note, ever. They are only really applicable in a situation where the customer deserves nothing (in which case a credit note is doing well for them.)

Sam Vimes

mickoneill30 wrote: »

And there are two situations where it does this.

1: Just after you buy it (from 5 minutes to about 4 weeks)
I've never had a retailer not replace / refund an item in that situation. Who would accept a repair of an item (which might take weeks) that you bought yesterday when there are 10 of them sitting on the retailers shelves?

2: After a reasonable period of time.
Then it's a repair / replacement / refund.

It's worded craply and it shouldn't be open to interpretation. I've no idea why it's obscure but how hard would it be for the consumer associations or government to make it a law that if something goes faulty in the first 4 weeks through no fault of the consumer then it's repair / replace / refund at the consumers request and at any time after that let the retailer decide which of the 3 to do.

i've seen it in a few isolated cases but in the vast majority of cases, the retailer would either replace or refund it within a few days.

but as you there is no hard and fast rule about it. as you say in point 2, consumer law is all about what's reasonable and if you don't think you're being treated reasonably, you can have a judge decide for €9.

i suppose the reason they don't give a definite date is that all products are different. the first thing that pops into my mind is computer ram. it's very electro-statically sensitive so it's very easy to damage and in most cases people would take it home and put it straight into their pcs. so if they were going to damage it, they'd do it in the first few days.

if there was a law saying that a product should be replaced or refunded within, say, 30 days, ram manufacturers would have to give replacements even though they know the customer almost certainly damaged it themselves

Sam Vimes

SDooM wrote: »

Just to clarify a customer never has to accept a credit note, ever. They are only really applicable in a situation where the customer deserves nothing (in which case a credit note is doing well for them.)

maybe they don't have to but in a lot of cases it would be acceptable. say for example the customer is entitled to a replacement but the item is out of stock. the retailer could give the customer a credit note until then. it would save them having to bring the item home and back again

mickoneill30

SDooM wrote: »

Having worked with electronics I certainly never handed out a refund for a first week fault, unless the manufacturer had some kind of special remedy in place (Which some companies do, and should be appluaded for such.)

I've worked as a salesperson in an electronics shop a loooong time ago. Generally where somebody bought something from us and it was faulty in the first week we'd have no hesitation replacing it (as long as it wasn't obvious that it was the customers fault, and generally they'd get a lot of the benefit of the doubt). The manufacturers never gave us a problem replacing it either. And I've been on the other end of the counter where I've bought faulty stuff and never had a problem bringing it back. I suppose the moral of the story is shop where you get treated well and if you don't then take your business elsewhere and let everybody know about it. In that vein two shops that have let me refund or replace (a faulty item) at my discretion within the first week have been PC World (I know they're expensive but I was in a hurry) and Power City and then there's Argos but they let you take anything back even if you just don't like it.

I did have screamers come in after 6 months DEMANDING THEIR RIGHTS with no receipts and items bent in two. They were fun.

Sam Vimes

mickoneill30 wrote: »

I did have screamers come in after 6 months DEMANDING THEIR RIGHTS with no receipts and items bent in two. They were fun.

ah yes they were great fun. i always had a plan to print out the page from citizensinformation.ie about their rights and when they started off, i would say "well i happen to have a copy of your rights right here. Please point out the relevant part"

never bothered in the end though

the other week i was in heathrow and a woman came into the book shop i was in and said: "i bought this book a few minutes ago for £7.99 but it says on the back 'Recommended retail price £6.99'. you can't charge me more than that"

she got back her pound and all when she left i told the staff that they didn't have to do that and they said it was just easier than arguing with her

Nody

Sam Vimes wrote: »

she got back her pound and all when she left i told the staff that they didn't have to do that and they said it was just easier than arguing with her

Should have explained it was the new UK Anti terrorism tax which is charged at all airports .

foggy_lad

When goods are bought the 'consumer' has a contract with the seller. Under this contract the consumer has a legal right to expect that the goods will be of merchantable quality. This means that the goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what is said about them (advertising), what they are supposed to do, their durability and their price. Goods must also be fit for their purpose: in short they must do what they are sold as being capable of doing, and they must also be as described. The description on a package must not be misleading. Goods can be described in a brochure, or orally by a salesperson. Where goods are bought on seeing a sample, they should correspond with the sample. [e.g: if a consumer buys 20 rolls of wallpaper on the basis of looking at a sample roll the remaining 19 rolls must be the same as the sample roll looked at].

A consumer cannot claim for faults specifically brought to his or her attention or for faults which should have been noticed assuming that the goods were examined.

Credit notes
Notices saying that only credit notes will be given have no legal effect. Where a retailer accepts a complaint as valid the consumer can refuse a credit note and insist on a refund, or, as appropriate, a replacement of the goods.

Sam Vimes

foggy_lad wrote: »

When goods are bought the 'consumer' has a contract with the seller. Under this contract the consumer has a legal right to expect that the goods will be of merchantable quality. This means that the goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what is said about them (advertising), what they are supposed to do, their durability and their price. Goods must also be fit for their purpose: in short they must do what they are sold as being capable of doing, and they must also be as described. The description on a package must not be misleading. Goods can be described in a brochure, or orally by a salesperson. Where goods are bought on seeing a sample, they should correspond with the sample. [e.g: if a consumer buys 20 rolls of wallpaper on the basis of looking at a sample roll the remaining 19 rolls must be the same as the sample roll looked at].

A consumer cannot claim for faults specifically brought to his or her attention or for faults which should have been noticed assuming that the goods were examined.

Credit notes
Notices saying that only credit notes will be given have no legal effect. Where a retailer accepts a complaint as valid the consumer can refuse a credit note and insist on a refund, or, as appropriate, a replacement of the goods.

yeah i remember reading that piece of text somewhere. where did you get it?

sd123

Thanks a million guys, the height of my customer rights knowlege came from JC Business! Good to know your rights, in general managers get scared if you quote sales of goods act or whatever, interesting stuff here!!