Would you abandon a brand over a bad experience?

Distance sellers usually have twenty-eight days in which to deliver and they have failed. It would be quicker and cheaper to speak to your card issuer who should cancel the payment if the cost was over £100 [S.75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974]. They might be willing to do so anyway but would not be legally obliged to if the cost was under £100 . Or you could instruct the seller [in writing] to cancel the sale for breach of contract and demand repayment. If that did not work then you would probably have to go through the court claim process in order to get your money back. That will incur trouble and expense but you can ask for costs if you are successful.

Customers have redress against the newspaper if an advertiser defaults but that does not apply in the case of catalogue inserts; another weakening of consumer protection brought about by changes in retailing practices.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

The Consumer Rights Act takes precedence over conflicting contract conditions and terms. You have 14 days to cancel the contract or return the goods if bought at distance. The 14 day period starts the day after the consumer, or someone selected by the consumer, receives the goods.

You (the seller)should refund all monies received. This includes the outbound delivery cost, unless the consumer chose to have the goods delivered by more expensive means than the cheapest standard delivery option offered. If so, you do not have to refund the full outbound delivery cost, but only the cost of the standard delivery option which the consumer could have chosen. You must repay the consumer without undue delay, and no later than 14 days starting the day after you receive the goods back. If the consumer provides proof of return before you receive the goods back, you should refund without undue delay and no later than 14 days starting the day after you receive that proof.

Since Brian has still [8 March] not received the order he placed on 29 January 2017 then there is a clear breach of contract and he is entitled to get his money back immediately. Whether or not the product was in stock or whether the fulfilment process has broken down are not relevant. I would hope he will not have to make a court claim. It would be worth checking the position with his credit card issuer first just in case payment has not yet been taken but that would be unlikely in my opinion. Getting the card company to cancel the payment and refund it to his account would be the cleanest way of resolving this – except he still wants a bed vacuum cleaner and I note that Robert Dyas sell the same model as Easylife at the same price but in a different colour. There are also other options .

This comment was removed at the request of the user

The Consumer Rights Act says that a repair should be done in a reasonable time and without unreasonable inconvenience. A fault gives you the option to choose a repair or a replacement; if you choose a repair that fails you can then opt for a replacement. in your case I’d suggest you approach your retailer with this information and either get a replacement or at least a loan watch until yours is returned.

I suggest contacting the manufacturer of the fridge-freezer to see if they will offer any goodwill such as a significant discount on a new appliance. They have no legal requirement to help but you might be lucky.

Your legal rights lie with whoever you purchase goods from, even if they subcontracted work like providing and installing an appliance.

Here is another Conversation where there is discussion of consumers’ rights over faulty products: https://conversation.which.co.uk/shopping/return-faulty-broken-product-free-repair-replacement/

Phil, I had exactly the same problem with a Hotpoint fridge freezer, just 3 years old. I paid them to look at at on a no-fix no-pay basis. They offered me a new f/f at a “discount” but a very unattractive offer. I emailed them that under the Sale of Goods Act there is a requirement that a product should be “durable”, and mine clearly was not, as it should have lasted longer than 3 years. Whether their next response was affected by this or not, they rang to offer a new f/f/, take the old one away and I negotiated a 2 years guarantee.

How common is it? You see if we have evidence that it is a relatively widespread fault then we have some grounds to pursue the SoGA / CRA durability requirement.

I don’t know, Malcolm, but I have heard of a few cases recently. As we have discussed previously, evidence of frequent problems should be taken into account when handling claims under our statutory rights. I’m also interested in what happens when the fault occurs.

Your consumer rights lie against the retailer from whom you bought the charger. Without knowing more about how and when you purchased the charger it is impossible to give more definitive advice but if you follow the links at the foot of the Introduction to this Conversation you might find some useful guidance.

This comment was removed at the request of the user

I doubt you would get anyone to sign it, Edward. What we should have is a “Standard Terms and Conditions” developed independently ( there are standard contracts in the commercial world to avoid having to go through every new one with a fine toothcomb) that all retailers use, with any exceptions highlighted.

Deliberate misrepresentation is an offence, Fitzmichael, so if, after having a pricing error pointed out, the retailer fails to correct it and maintains the item on offer at a price they will not accept that is a false sale. In my experience some of the big retailers will not honour a wrong price in the customer’s favour; they tend to know the law and argue that an offer to treat is not binding. The major supermarkets will generally accept the lower price displayed on the shelf or product even if the barcode says otherwise.