Refund Repair Replacement Refurbishment!

jel

Hi,

I have a phone that is 11 months old that has recently fell to pieces. I have returned it to the shop for repair, however i expect that they will give me back a refurbed piece as the particular faults dont seem feasible to repair.

Do you know if I am entitled to refuse the refurbed item and demand a repair to my original phone, a replacement or refund?

seamus

The option to repair/refund/replace is at the discretion of the retailer. However, you are entitled to have the item which you paid for, so if the value of the refurb is less than the value of the exact model phone you had, at 11 months, then you can refuse the refurb.

That is if you had a "Nogiem 5341" and they attempt to give you a refurbed Nogiem 5340 or a 2 year old Nogiem 5341, then they're not giving you what you're entitled to.

grinder23

In my experience if the phone has fallen to pieces and is 11 months old you might be getting "BER due to customer/physical damage" message back from the repair company.

jel

I think "fallen to pieces" was a bit harsh. I've had many phones for longer perdiods of time with the same level of use, and they never went like this.

Essentially 2 of the buttons came off, and the top casing that houses the USB charger slot came off.

Taking the buttons as an example, they seem stick on, and are fundamentally flawed.

foggy_lad

seamus wrote: »

The option to repair/refund/replace is at the discretion of the retailer. However, you are entitled to have the item which you paid for, so if the value of the refurb is less than the value of the exact model phone you had, at 11 months, then you can refuse the refurb.

That is if you had a "Nogiem 5341" and they attempt to give you a refurbed Nogiem 5340 or a 2 year old Nogiem 5341, then they're not giving you what you're entitled to.

the repair replace or refund is not at the discretion of the retailer, they can offer to repair replace or refund but the consumer does not have to accept whichever remedy the retailer offers and may have to seek redress through the small claims court if the retailer disagrees with them.

seamus

foggy_lad wrote: »

the repair replace or refund is not at the discretion of the retailer, they can offer to repair replace or refund but the consumer does not have to accept whichever remedy the retailer offers and may have to seek redress through the small claims court if the retailer disagrees with them.

http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Hot_Topics/Guides-to-Consumer-Law/Shopping/faults.html

You're technically right but the small claims court won't look favourably on any consumer who didn't give any retailer a reasonable chance to redress the issue before taking action. Ultimately a consumer can't demand that a retailer do anything.

drunkmonkey

If the phone has fallen to pieces after 11mts of usage it's down to physical damage or lack of care by it's owner. No retailer is going to exchange, refund, replace the phone. It will be sent for repair and the repair company will decide on the course of action. Repair/Replacement or feck off you've wrecked it..

This isn't a Nokia 5310 by any chance??

jel

No it's a Nokia 6500 classic.

My point is that if the phone is fundamentally lacking in build quality and is basically a piece of sh**, should I have to suffer?

They can claim that it's through lack of care, although i can claim it's through lack of quality.

madmik

jel wrote: »

No it's a Nokia 6500 classic.

My point is that if the phone is fundamentally lacking in build quality and is basically a piece of sh**, should I have to suffer?

They can claim that it's through lack of care, although i can claim it's through lack of quality.

its an entry level phone that has a life expectancy of 12 months

beleieve it or not theyre designed that way by nokia R and D

subway

you'll probably have to argue your case at the SCC if the shop wont entertain you.
note that some posters here work for phone shops and will give you misleading answers about your rights.

if you didnt cause the damage you are entitled to redress. normal wear and tear shouldnt casue an item to break, regardless of what phone shop staff will tell you

jel

subway wrote: »

you'll probably have to argue your case at the SCC if the shop wont entertain you.
note that some posters here work for phone shops and will give you misleading answers about your rights.

if you didnt cause the damage you are entitled to redress. normal wear and tear shouldnt casue an item to break, regardless of what phone shop staff will tell you

Thanks, yep I agree. I've actually used the SCC twice, both successful. They really are a great service.

I'll see what the phone shop/repair people come back with and let you know. I think if they repair it or provide a refurb that's of equal or greater value i'll accept it, otherwise i'll go further.

drunkmonkey

jel wrote: »

otherwise i'll go further.

best place could be ebay and get yourself a a new keypad and charger cover if no luck, if you don't want to be without your phone might be worth the €10 odd to diy it....make sure and back it up before it goes for repair...

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

best place could be ebay and get yourself a a new keypad and charger cover if no luck, if you don't want to be without your phone might be worth the €10 odd to diy it....make sure and back it up before it goes for repair...

best place is back to the shop you bought it and stay calm even when the staff ignore your reasonlble requests/claims. after that write to the shop in question then if their response is unsatisfactory it should be off to the local court office for SCC forms.

smithcity

Hey all, this is similar to an issue I'm having.
I've just sent a laptop to be repaired, it's still under warranty but when I went to the shop where I bought it, D.I.D, they asked me to call Toshiba (the laptop maker) directly.
I did so and I got in touch with the company that carriers out their repairs, Teleplan. They have sent a courier to collect it.
However I looked up Teleplan online, they have an appalling record of finding reasons to claim that the warranty has been voided and then trying to charge hundreds of quid for repairs.
If this was to happen, where would I stand legally? Teleplan are based in Colchester, UK (that's where my laptop is now) so would Small Claims have any power to touch them?
Should I have stood my ground and insisted that D.I.D take the laptop?
I only went around them this time because I have had previous nightmare issues trying to get D.I.D to honour a gaurantee after failing to repair a TV a few years ago. (Typically they refused to do anything till I threatened them with small claims)

drunkmonkey

you have to weigh up the situation, is it worth going to court over a broken keypad or would it just be easier to pick up a new one for a couple of euro..if you've nothing better to do go down the court route if you want, seems like a lot of trouble for a keypad and a charger cover...

Foggy your very good at telling people go to court, have you ever actually been?

smithcity

Small claims isnt a big deal. Cost's 15 euro to make your claim and they take care of it from there on out.

subway

drunkmonkey wrote: »

you have to weigh up the situation, is it worth going to court over a broken keypad or would it just be easier to pick up a new one for a couple of euro..if you've nothing better to do go down the court route if you want, seems like a lot of trouble for a keypad and a charger cover...

Foggy your very good at telling people go to court, have you ever actually been?

if its not so much trouble why do phone shops make such a big deal out of it?
answer: they make a lot of money by flouting the law, and staff like yourself are complicit.

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

you have to weigh up the situation, is it worth going to court over a broken keypad or would it just be easier to pick up a new one for a couple of euro..if you've nothing better to do go down the court route if you want, seems like a lot of trouble for a keypad and a charger cover...

Foggy your very good at telling people go to court, have you ever actually been?

it is more about getting the store to fullfill its obligations to the customer rather than about the cost of any repair replacement etc, why should i or anyone repair something(voiding the "guarantee" that your consumer rights affords you) when the store is obliged to look after you?

drunkmonkey

subway wrote: »

if its not so much trouble why do phone shops make such a big deal out of it?
answer: they make a lot of money by flouting the law, and staff like yourself are complicit.

foggy_lad wrote: »

it is more about getting the store to fullfill its obligations to the customer rather than about the cost of any repair replacement etc, why should i or anyone repair something(voiding the "guarantee" that your consumer rights affords you) when the store is obliged to look after you?

@subway, flouting the law my ass, were talking about an 11mt old keypad ffs. Hardly the thing retirement funds are built on.

@foggy you've no rights when it comes to wear and tear, you fix it and move on. Just like a puncture on a bicycle. You don't go suing goodyear for a new tyre.

subway

drunkmonkey wrote: »

@subway, flouting the law my ass, were talking about an 11mt old keypad ffs. Hardly the thing retirement funds are built on.

@foggy you've no rights when it comes to wear and tear, you fix it and move on. Just like a puncture on a bicycle. You don't go suing goodyear for a new tyre.

great attitude.
and hundreds of thousands of phone repiars at, say, 50eu a pop is a lot of money for a company like nokia who should be paying for them.

we've had this argument before, wear and tear is subjective.
i dont know about this indivual case, buts it seems fairly obvious that phone stores blame wear and tear a lot more than most others. (99% i think was your made up statistic)

drunkmonkey

subway wrote: »

great attitude.
and hundreds of thousands of phone repiars at, say, 50eu a pop is a lot of money for a company like nokia who should be paying for them.

we've had this argument before, wear and tear is subjective.
i dont know about this indivual case, buts it seems fairly obvious that phone stores blame wear and tear a lot more than most others. (99% i think was your made up statistic)

a broken keypad after 11mts is wear and tear, if it was a fault it should have showed up in the first few week.

What other product can you take back to a store after 11mts of daily use and blame it on bad manufacturing and threaten the staff with court action?

As for my attitude, i'm the one who has to deal with the bullcrap sprouted from people like you. With your Sue, Sue, Sue mentality, take a little bit of responsibility and have a little bit of cop on.

€5 fix versus court = no brainer.

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

a broken keypad after 11mts is wear and tear, if it was a fault it should have showed up in the first few week.

What other product can you take back to a store after 11mts of daily use and blame it on bad manufacturing and threaten the staff with court action?

As for my attitude, i'm the one who has to deal with the bullcrap sprouted from people like you. With your Sue, Sue, Sue mentality, take a little bit of responsibility and have a little bit of cop on.

€5 fix versus court = no brainer.

i will note that you feel yourself expert enough to diagnose wear and tear on a damaged/faulty handset you have not seen it and when you have no contact with the op about this. you should make yourself an expert in consumer rights and law as handsets should be reasonably durable and the keypad should really last just as long as the rest of the handset as it is in for more use/punishment from long fingernails pens etc

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

a broken keypad after 11mts is wear and tear, if it was a fault it should have showed up in the first few week.

What other product can you take back to a store after 11mts of daily use and blame it on bad manufacturing and threaten the staff with court action?

As for my attitude, i'm the one who has to deal with the bullcrap sprouted from people like you. With your Sue, Sue, Sue mentality, take a little bit of responsibility and have a little bit of cop on.

€5 fix versus court = no brainer.

televisions games consoles almost all items on sale designed to last more than a year! almost all phones come with a 2 year manufacturer warrenty nowadays so if the manufacturer feels the handsets should last at least 2 years that is some indacation only of what reasonably durable should be.

again as far as fixing the item yourself goes it would not be advisdable as this will void any guarantee you have and even the manufacturer will refuse to look at it as it has been opened/interfered with by an unauthorised repair person!

you sound like you should just quit and find a job buried deep in some windowless office as you cant be providing any service to customers with that attitude

drunkmonkey

foggy_lad wrote: »

televisions games consoles almost all items on sale designed to last more than a year! almost all phones come with a 2 year manufacturer warrenty nowadays so if the manufacturer feels the handsets should last at least 2 years that is some indacation only of what reasonably durable should be.

again as far as fixing the item yourself goes it would not be advisdable as this will void any guarantee you have and even the manufacturer will refuse to look at it as it has been opened/interfered with by an unauthorised repair person!

Foggy you don't carry your xbox around in your pocket every day, nor do you give legal advice if your not a trained professional, you seem to think you are, telling people to cancel their direct debit and ignore warning letters and to sue over keypads.

My advice to go get the parts yourself if you want a cheap easy fix, if the repair company says it's wear and tear, it's not my advice as first course of action.

There is a 2 year warranty with that handset, it should last the distance but some items might not be covered as it could be deemed customer damage.

Again the attitude, it's with you and subway not my customers, If that was my customer they'd walk out with a smile and a keypad within minutes, probably at no charge (as I value their custom) as I have a few of them lying around from damaged handsets.

subway

if you must know, i deal with hardware support.
our systems have a life cycle of up to 5 years.
faults dont just happen on day one and it is legally incorrect to adopt that stance.

all consumer products in europe have a life cycle of at least 2 years.
products must be able to withstand the daily wear and tear they will encoutner within that 2 years or they are not fit for purpose. oviously an xbox has different requirements to a phone.

im not "spouting bullcrap" and as for the "people like you" comment. i am a customer who knows my rights. unfortunately for you, you will have to deal with people like me from time to time

drunkmonkey

I'm a consumer as well, keys fell of my dell keyboard, didn't think they'd give me a new one but a few days later a new keyboard arrived in the post. If they didn't I wouldn't have taken them to court, I would have just fixed it myself. (will I buy dell again, yes. The same goes for Nokia, i've never personally had a problem gettting a phone repaired under warranty.

The phone should withstand normal use and the repair company should fix it, my comment was a "what if" it all depends on the engineers discretion. In this case if could go 50/50 but i've seen someone else with the exacty same problem so i'd expect it to be fixed under warranty for the op.

Sorry if the "like you" comment caused offence, it's just when people start saying to sue (especially when foggys involved) my blood starts to boil. Sue if it's something that puts a dent in your pocket but if it's something like a keypad just bite the bullet and get a new keypad if your deemed to have damaged it.

Sam Vimes

drunkmonkey wrote: »

a broken keypad after 11mts is wear and tear, if it was a fault it should have showed up in the first few week.

What other product can you take back to a store after 11mts of daily use and blame it on bad manufacturing

In fairness, lots. If something is badly manufactured it won't necessarily show up immediately, like there could be a badly soldered joint that breaks after repeated pressure. There was an issue exactly like that with the charging socket of some laptop in a thread a few months ago. It happened to loads of people but the company wouldn't acknowledge the problem. That's why warranties are supposed to be one to two years.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

and threaten the staff with court action?

As for my attitude, i'm the one who has to deal with the bullcrap sprouted from people like you. With your Sue, Sue, Sue mentality, take a little bit of responsibility and have a little bit of cop on.

Now that's not on. The staff in the shop don't have the power to override the policy so they're threatening the wrong people. They might as well be threatening to sue the shop next door because they have as much control over the policy as you

MunsterCycling

As representatives of the shop they can only expect to get the flak for an illegal policy.

MC

Sam Vimes

MunsterCycling wrote: »

As representatives of the shop they can only expect to get the flak for an illegal policy.

MC

If the flak is being given to the shop staff nothing will ever change. The people who make the policy sit in their offices playing solitaire while the people who have no choice over the policy take all the flak for it.

What's the point in shouting at someone who doesn't like the policy any more than you but who has no choice but to enforce it? When I worked there, it's not like I was messing with people's heads and if they shouted at me loud enough I'd suddenly go "ah yeah here you go. Now that you've shouted and threatened me that means I won't get sacked for giving you a phone that I'm not allowed to give you".

MunsterCycling

Not what I meant, they of course should be passing the information onto the brass and they in turn should be available for the public to berate.

MC

subway

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Sorry if the "like you" comment caused offence, it's just when people start saying to sue (especially when foggys involved) my blood starts to boil. Sue if it's something that puts a dent in your pocket but if it's something like a keypad just bite the bullet and get a new keypad if your deemed to have damaged it.

not to put words in your mouth, but either you're confusing me with someone else or you're confusing my advice to pursue an unsatisfactory response through the SCC with sueing someone.

every consumer has the right to have a judgment given by the SCC and you should thead very carefully, as a representative of a shop, when advising customers that they shouldnt pursue something through the SCC (if that's what you are saying you would do)

and i have experience on both sides of the "wear & tear / user damage" issue and its not something that black and white. a report can generally only say "probable user damage" or "potential mis-use". proving beyond a doubt is a tough call in these situations.

now to finish off, i feel i have been civil to you at all times DrunkMonkey, i would hope for the same in return. if you feel i havent, please pm me and i will see if i can edit my post.

Sam Vimes

I'm all for the top brass being available for the public to berate. There's no point in the staff passing the info on because they already know. They're under no illusions that it's a popular policy so the thing to do is find the number for head office or preferably the direct number for some top guy and shout at him about it

Davy

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I'm all for the top brass being available for the public to berate. There's no point in the staff passing the info on because they already know. They're under no illusions that it's a popular policy so the thing to do is find the number for head office or preferably the direct number for some top guy and shout at him about it

You say that like you've said that before :pac:

Sam Vimes

subway wrote: »

and i have experience on both sides of the "wear & tear / user damage" issue and its not something that black and white. a report can generally only say "probable user damage" or "potential mis-use". proving beyond a doubt is a tough call in these situations.

You only have to prove beyond doubt in criminal cases. In civil cases it's done on the balance of probability

Sam Vimes

Davy wrote: »

You say that like you've said that before :pac:

If you look back you'll see that every one of my 13,325 are on this topic :pac:

subway

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You only have to prove beyond doubt in criminal cases. In civil cases it's done on the balance of probability

thats interesting, i guess i had a feeling it was like that, but was assuming the strongest scenario as I wasnt sure.

would you have more info on what the judge might use as guidelines for "probability". are there statistics they would refer to etc, or is just down to who sounds more plausible on the day?

smithcity

Drunkmonkey, fair enough if you're happy for your purchases to begin to fall apart and degrade due to normal use.
Most people aren't. The fact is that some brands of phone are notorious for their short life spans. Nokia's and Sony Ericssons seem to be the worst of the lot. They are shoddily made and it's pretty typical that they begin to show faults of they are out of warranty or gaurauntee.

Most people aren't like yourself, if we find that our phones or other products don't last as long as the legally binding gaurantee covers it for, we're totally right to expect that they will be repaired or replaced.

If a company refuses to honour their legal obligations, what is wrong with taking them to small claims court? I would say that we have a moral obligation to do so.
The fact that far too many people allow themselves to be walked all over by companies that ignore their after sales responsibilities, is most likely the reason that they find it so easy to do (ignore customer rights I mean).
It's not just inconvenient for the person involved, it hurts the case of every other person that tries to have their rights satisfied.

seamus

subway wrote: »

every consumer has the right to have a judgment given by the SCC and you should thead very carefully, as a representative of a shop, when advising customers that they shouldnt pursue something through the SCC (if that's what you are saying you would do)

I think his point is that the SCC should only be used as a last resort and where the consumer has been genuinely treated badly. Using the SCC as a first resort (i.e. without giving the retailer reasonable chance for redress) is wrong, as is using the SCC to get your way when you're at fault.

subway

seamus wrote: »

I think his point is that the SCC should only be used as a last resort and where the consumer has been genuinely treated badly. Using the SCC as a first resort (i.e. without giving the retailer reasonable chance for redress) is wrong, as is using the SCC to get your way when you're at fault.

100% agree, and i don't think I've ever made a suggestion otherwise.

Sam Vimes

subway wrote: »

thats interesting, i guess i had a feeling it was like that, but was assuming the strongest scenario as I wasnt sure.

would you have more info on what the judge might use as guidelines for "probability". are there statistics they would refer to etc, or is just down to who sounds more plausible on the day?

I might have given the impression that I know a lot about it but I don't

I don't know how they come to their decision but my instinct would be to say that he can only consider evidence that's been presented so if you wanted him to refer to statistics you'd have to present them in evidence.


Think of Judge Judy and you'll get the idea :pac:

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm a consumer as well, keys fell of my dell keyboard, didn't think they'd give me a new one but a few days later a new keyboard arrived in the post. If they didn't I wouldn't have taken them to court, I would have just fixed it myself. (will I buy dell again, yes. The same goes for Nokia, i've never personally had a problem gettting a phone repaired under warranty.

you would have been perfectly entitled to seek a replacement or repair from dell if the keypad had not been damaged by yourself or by some other accidental damage, and if they failed to provide replacement or repair or a refund of the cost of the keypad you would be foolish to just let them away with ignoring consumer rights.

The phone should withstand normal use and the repair company should fix it, my comment was a "what if" it all depends on the engineers discretion. In this case if could go 50/50 but i've seen someone else with the exacty same problem so i'd expect it to be fixed under warranty for the op.

without being a repair person that has examined the op's handset you can not say whether or not it is due to customer damage regardless of what you have seen.

Sorry if the "like you" comment caused offence, it's just when people start saying to sue (especially when foggys involved) my blood starts to boil. Sue if it's something that puts a dent in your pocket but if it's something like a keypad just bite the bullet and get a new keypad if your deemed to have damaged it.

the small claims court is there to help consumers deal with companies and shops that would seek to deny them their statutory rights, it has nothing to do with sueing and everything to do with getting what you are entitled to in law! and a faulty keypad in a handset that is 11months old will put a dent in your pocket as it takes from the value of the handset if you chose to sell it on adverts or anywhere else!

seamus wrote: »

I think his point is that the SCC should only be used as a last resort and where the consumer has been genuinely treated badly. Using the SCC as a first resort (i.e. without giving the retailer reasonable chance for redress) is wrong, as is using the SCC to get your way when you're at fault.

i agree but i have never heard of people going to the SCC without having given the shop/business every reasonable opportunity to fulfill their obligations. afaik the SCC insists on written complaints being sent to the offending company to ensure claims are only started as a last resort.