Replacement issue

Stylesclash07

I have returned a device under consumer law outside of the 1 warranty the store gave, they replaced the device with a refurbished item but when I use this it is also faulty. They have agreed to exchange for another second hand device but I don’t like this idea, I have asked if I could pay the different to get a brand new device but they have said no. Another issue I also have is the replacement items are only priced at half the original price I paid for the device.

listermint

You are outside warranty. It sounds like the store is being quite reasonable tbh.

Stylesclash07

listermint wrote: »

You are outside warranty. It sounds like the store is being quite reasonable tbh.

Even if the replacement device was faulty the moment I turned it on

listermint

Stylesclash07 wrote: »

Even if the replacement device was faulty the moment I turned it on

The replacement item is not the original item, they didnt have to give you anything but they did.

I would suggest you test out the next replacement item to your satisfaction before leaving the store.

Xterminator

Hi Op

the warranty can be a useful extra but your strongest consumer rights come from the sale of goods and suppy of service act.

Basically if your device stops working within the period where you would have reasonable expected it to still work , (up to 6 years) you are entitled to seek redress. this is with the retailer not the manufacturer. The expected lifetime would be guided by the price you paid, and how long a ressonable device should last.

you would be entitled to seek one of the 3 rs (repair replace refund) from the retailer.

you were offered a replacement, device and that is a reasonable offer. It has to be working of course.

Your further point that the retail cost of your device has dropped, is countered by the fact that you have had a years of use of your device and its value is also depreciated. Expecting to get full initial retail price is unreasonable IMO.

The small claims court would adjust any award to take this under consideration & you would not get this if you pursured this in court. Also the fact you rejected a reasonable offer of remedy would be considered.

You have been offered a satisfactory remedy, and id suggest you accept the replacement. It is a fair offer and meets their obligations under law.

Stylesclash07

Xterminator wrote: »

Hi Op

the warranty can be a useful extra but your strongest consumer rights come from the sale of goods and suppy of service act.

Basically if your device stops working within the period where you would have reasonable expected it to still work , (up to 6 years) you are entitled to seek redress. this is with the retailer not the manufacturer. The expected lifetime would be guided by the price you paid, and how long a ressonable device should last.

you would be entitled to seek one of the 3 rs (repair replace refund) from the retailer.

you were offered a replacement, device and that is a reasonable offer. It has to be working of course.

Your further point that the retail cost of your device has dropped, is countered by the fact that you have had a years of use of your device and its value is also depreciated. Expecting to get full initial retail price is unreasonable IMO.

The small claims court would adjust any award to take this under consideration & you would not get this if you pursured this in court. Also the fact you rejected a reasonable offer of remedy would be considered.

You have been offered a satisfactory remedy, and id suggest you accept the replacement. It is a fair offer and meets their obligations under law.

Sorry again for this, if the replacement was not working and they want to have another replacement, a second hand replacement this is ok. Just want to be sure very sorry for this

Stylesclash07

Stylesclash07 wrote: »

Sorry again for this, if the replacement was not working and they want to have another replacement, a second hand replacement this is ok. Just want to be sure very sorry for this

Also how does this work

Reduction in price: If the item has been repaired or replaced and it is still not working correctly, you could look to have a reduction in the price you paid for it, if you are happy to put up with the fault.


Taken from

https://www.ccpc.ie/consumers/2015/04/10/rights-buy-faulty-product/

mdebets

Stylesclash07 wrote: »

Sorry again for this, if the replacement was not working and they want to have another replacement, a second hand replacement this is ok. Just want to be sure very sorry for this

That's not correct.
You have the right to the 3Rs (Repair, Replacement, Refund). Once a product isn't working anymore, the retailer can use one of the 3 Rs (in theory, you could decline his offer, but you would need a good reason for this, so normally it's the one the retailer offers). Now, if your product breaks again, the retailer cannot use the R used before, but he has to offer one of the other 2 remaining Rs. In your case, he already replaced the product, so at the second time, he can only offer you a repair or refund, but not a replacement again.
In regards to the offer of a second hand replacement, that could be a grey area. Normally, the replacement has to be a new one, but you could argue that if the original has been used for a few years and dependent on the type of product, it could be ok.

mdebets

Stylesclash07 wrote: »

Also how does this work

Reduction in price: If the item has been repaired or replaced and it is still not working correctly, you could look to have a reduction in the price you paid for it, if you are happy to put up with the fault.


Taken from

https://www.ccpc.ie/consumers/2015/04/10/rights-buy-faulty-product/

I just had a read through this site and also through https://www.ccpc.ie/consumers/shopping/faulty-goods/ , which explains it a little bit better, and is also linked from the citizensinformation.ie, where I can't find the old 3R rule anymore.
Was there a change in Irish legislation recently, as the text above looks more like the EU rule (refund only if broken from the outset, 6 months rule of being the retailer's fault when the error happens in the first 6 months after buying).

Stylesclash07

mdebets wrote: »

That's not correct.
You have the right to the 3Rs (Repair, Replacement, Refund). Once a product isn't working anymore, the retailer can use one of the 3 Rs (in theory, you could decline his offer, but you would need a good reason for this, so normally it's the one the retailer offers). Now, if your product breaks again, the retailer cannot use the R used before, but he has to offer one of the other 2 remaining Rs. In your case, he already replaced the product, so at the second time, he can only offer you a repair or refund, but not a replacement again.
In regards to the offer of a second hand replacement, that could be a grey area. Normally, the replacement has to be a new one, but you could argue that if the original has been used for a few years and dependent on the type of product, it could be ok.

Thank you this is great, I spoke to citizens information and they advised I have a case for small claims, I don’t want to do that as I feel the device is not that important, but I have lost complete confidence in their second hand devices.