Issue with Traynors - no refund?

kkelly77

I purchased a nearside and offside rear caliper yesterday from Traynors. Turns out the nearside caliper they sold me is faulty but as well as that, I managed to get the original one freed up.

Contacted them today to advise them and asked how to I go about getting a refund. I was told they don't do refunds Surely this can't be right. They offered me a replacement part, which I told them I didn't need and then offered a credit note, which I don't want. Under consumer law, aren't I entitled to a refund?

(Mods: wasn't sure if this was for Motors or Consumer Issues. Pls move if necessary. Thanks.)

Bodhan

kkelly77 wrote: »

I purchased a nearside and offside rear caliper yesterday from Traynors. Turns out the nearside caliper is faulty but as well as that, I managed to get the original one freed up.

Contacted them today to advise them and asked how to I go about getting a refund. I was told they don't do refunds Surely this can't be right. They offered me a replacement part, which I told them I didn't need and then offered a credit note, which I don't want. Under consumer law, aren't I entitled to a refund?

(Mods: wasn't sure if this was for Motors or Consumer Issues. Pls move if necessary. Thanks.)

Under consumer law if they had sold you something that wasn't fit for purpose then you would be entitled to a refund but, as I see it you ordered a part which is the right part and they sold it too you.
Just because you didn't use it doesn't mean they'll refund you. They have to sell the part again or return the part.

Sorry OP I'd take the credit note as they don't have to do anything for you as the law goes.

kkelly77

Bodhan wrote: »

Under consumer law if they had sold you something that wasn't fit for purpose then you would be entitled to a refund but, as I see it you ordered a part which is the right part and they sold it too you.
Just because you didn't use it doesn't mean they'll refund you. They have to sell the part again or return the part.

Sorry OP I'd take the credit note as they don't have to do anything for you as the law goes.

I've edited my original post. The part they sold me was faulty and therefore not fit for purpose.

Bodhan

kkelly77 wrote: »

I've edited my original post. The part they sold me was faulty and therefore not fit for purpose.

ahhhh, that's different then. What did they say when you told them it was faulty?
Can you prove it's faulty?
Depending on the answers you can chase them for a refund, btw it's harder to tell someone to go away when you're standing at the counter; don't do it over the phone.

MidlandsM

Most Breakers don't do refunds........thats the way they trade.

kkelly77

Bodhan wrote: »

ahhhh, that's different then. What did they say when you told them it was faulty?
Can you prove it's faulty?
Depending on the answers you can chase them for a refund, btw it's harder to tell someone to go away when you're standing at the counter; don't do it over the phone.

Only offered an exchange or credit note and that the parts are covered by a 30 day warranty. From what I remember about consumer law, as long as I'm returning it within 7 days, there should be no issue with a refund. As regards proof the part is faulty, the Honda garage I gave the part to to fit told me it was faulty. They said the caliper is completely seized and "useless".

As Traynors are based in Armagh and I am not my only option is to deal with them over the phone.

Big Nasty

MidlandsM wrote: »

Most Breakers don't do refunds........thats the way they trade.

There's a German car breakers just of the Nangor road that I've gotten spares from before. On one occasion I got an ignition switch from him, was the wrong one so he gave me another and tried to fit it at no extra cost. Was still the wrong part sohe gave me my money back (€40). I tried to hand him back €20 as he had made a lot of effort but he wouldn't take it.

Pretty nice of him I thought!

Anan1

kkelly77 wrote: »

I've edited my original post. The part they sold me was faulty and therefore not fit for purpose.

If that's the case then they have no choice but to refund you. If it turns into haqssle then the small claims court only costs €18.

si_guru

This is a second hand part right? Just to clarify.

kkelly77

si_guru wrote: »

This is a second hand part right? Just to clarify.

Correct.

I've been in touch with both the National consumer Agency and the European Consumer Centre who have both advised I am entitled to a refund.

Eoin

Anan1 wrote: »

If that's the case then they have no choice but to refund you. If it turns into haqssle then the small claims court only costs €18.

From this site:

Where goods do not conform to the above criteria, you are entitled under the Act to seek a repair, replacement or a refund.
The legislation does not specify whether it is the retailer/supplier or the customer who chooses the form of redress to be offered.

And that's talking about new items, not second hand ones. There seems to be a few grey areas!

ScouseMouse

Hang on folks.

Isnt traynors in the north?

If so, are they even bound by the small claims court?

What is the legislation for the UK?

Henry Ford III

You should be entitled to working parts, but I cannot see why you should be entitled to a refund.

pajo1981

Henry Ford III wrote: »

You should be entitled to working parts, but I cannot see why you should be entitled to a refund.

It's the law.

Why shouldn't you be entitled to a cash refund, as a matter of interest?

mickdw

Id say this could be down to how it was handled on the phone.

If the OP went on to them and said the part was faulty, had to source another one at short notice locally and now wished to return it for refund, they would likely sort it out but if the OP went on saying the part is useless and wanted money back only for them to come back saying they will exchange it, then the OP saying he didnt want it anymore, they would very possibly think he was pulling a fast one.

whippet

Under consumer law you are entitled to one of the 3R's ... Repair, Replacement or Refund.

You don't get to decide which of the three you want, the seller offers one of these solutions. If you don't agree you would have to take it to the SCC (if applicable)

In this case, you are being offered a replacement (as the original was faulty) ... this is all the seller has to offer you.

Should you go down the route of the SCC (if you are able to - NI v ROI Laws) I would say you don't have much of a case as the seller has offered a reasonable resolution to the original issue.

Its a bit of a pain, but you are not entitled to a refund.

Henry Ford III

pajo1981 wrote: »

....Why shouldn't you be entitled to a cash refund, as a matter of interest?

Because the seller isn't obliged to give one.

Buyer is entitled to working parts however, but just because he doesn't need one of the parts now doesn't entitle him to a refund.

Imagine walking into say Harvey Norman and buying a tv, and then returning it because your old one came back to life

Big Nasty

How much did this caliper cost BTW?

kkelly77

To update the thread - Traynors finally agreed to a refund.

Also, from the replies, it seems there are a few people who haven't read my original post properly. To clarify; 1 of the 2 calipers I purchased was faulty. According to the Honda garage that were fitting the calipers for me, the caliper I received was "seized" and "useless". As a consequence they worked on the original caliper to get it back into some sort of working order and try to keep a customer (me!) happy.

I did not just want Traynors to take their caliper back 'just because I didn't want it any more'. It was faulty and did not work. The fact that my local Honda dealer got me out of a jam has no bearing on my transaction with Traynors.

@MCMLXXV - caliper was £35

unkel

kkelly77 wrote: »

Also, from the replies, it seems there are a few people who haven't read my original post properly. To clarify; 1 of the 2 calipers I purchased was faulty.

Perhaps you haven't assessed some of the replies properly

whippet wrote: »

Under consumer law you are entitled to one of the 3R's ... Repair, Replacement or Refund.

You don't get to decide which of the three you want, the seller offers one of these solutions.

That's exactly my understanding of the jurisprudence. That's where you stand legally. Now in practice, many sellers will do better than that because it makes business sense to keep their customers satisfied rather than alienate them pointing to their minimum legal requirements

To summarise: you got your refund, but you were not entitled to it.

kkelly77

unkel wrote: »

To summarise: you got your refund, but you were not entitled to it.

The National Consumer Agency and European Consumer Centre confirmed I was.

unkel

I'd be very interested to see if there's any way you could share that with us? Have you a scanner? Or were they emails?

If a seller sold something not fit for purpose, they only have to offer either a replacement, or a repair, or a refund (all within reason), but they can pick the one they offer you

I can think of a case where the judge would find in favour of you but it would have to be something like this scenario:

you to Trainors: your product was faulty

Trainors to you: ok we'll ring you back

You to Trainors: ring back before the end of tomorrow, because I urgently need my car to be fixed

Trainors to you: ok

---Trainors do not ring back in time

you to Honda: can you sort this

Honda to you: sorted

Trainors ring back after your (reasonable) deadline: we'll send a replacement

You to Trainors: I don't need a replacement, car is now fixed. I need a refund

Trainors to you: no, we'll only give you replacement, repair or credit

pajo1981

kkelly77 wrote: »

The National Consumer Agency and European Consumer Centre confirmed I was.

Which one is it??

Is a transaction not like a contract- in that if one party reneges on their obligs (provides faulty part) then contract is voided (the buyer gets their money back)?

Eoin

kkelly77 wrote: »

The National Consumer Agency and European Consumer Centre confirmed I was.

Yet the NCA's own website says the opposite - see my earlier post. Anyway, all's well that ends well.

whippet

pajo1981 wrote: »

Is a transaction not like a contract- in that if one party reneges on their obligs (provides faulty part) then contract is voided (the buyer gets their money back)?

in this case neither party reneged on the contract, but the seller didn't complete proper performance of the contract and is entitled to a reasonable opportunity to complete the performance (i.e.. supply of working part)

To unwitting supply a faulty part isn't a 'breech' of contract unless the seller does not act to remedy the situation.