# Should/can he demand his money back?



## PaulB (26 Sep 2008)

I just got my eldest son into cycling and ignoring better offers on t'internet, I persuaded him to buy from our LBS. He struggled to afford a Giant SCR but went ahead with it anyway. This was just two weeks ago. On a ride last Thursday, the front deraileur went and he couldn't drop it into the smaller chain ring. This was a massive problem as he had three huge (for him) hills to negotiate to get back home. He took the bike back to the shop only to be told the mechanic was on holiday and wouldn't be able to look at it until yesterday. My son patiently waited, keen to get back on his pride and joy now we are having some reasonable weather, to be told the shifter has gone completely but as it was under warranty from Giant, they could get a new one shipped to them but it would take until next Friday AT THE EARLIEST to get it sorted for him. I feel so bad for him as he struggled to pay for a bike which he now loves but within a few days it fails on him.

My question is, can he demand his money back as the bike is faulty? The shop have offered him very poor service and didn't even suggest a loaner until his is ready. Frankly, we are fed up of hearing their hard luck stories and I am about ready to burn my bridges with them and ask for a full refund and we'll buy elsewhere.


----------



## snapper_37 (26 Sep 2008)

Not an expert in trading standards BUT the bike is 'unfit for purpose', ie knackered. You should just demand a full refund and look elsewhere IMO.


----------



## domtyler (26 Sep 2008)

Go in there and get your son's money back.


----------



## ACS (26 Sep 2008)

The Sales of Goods Act covers 2 apsect in this case. 'Not fit for purpose' and 'not of merchantable quality.' It is a long time since I studied Consumer Law and the laws relating to this Act have recently been updated so I feel is it not appropriate to express an opinion. 

May I suggest that your post the question on forum of the Money Saving Expert. This site is frequented by some very sharp consumers who really do have a grip on this kind of issue.

Best of luck.


----------



## rich p (26 Sep 2008)

Name and shame


----------



## Danny (26 Sep 2008)

Satans budgie is correct, you have a right to get a full refund under the Sale of Good Act. The Citizens Advice website Adviceguide has more information on this.

If you want a refund the key thing is to act quickly and tell the shop that you are rejecting the bike as it is not fit for purpose.

However, if you haven't lost all confidence in the shop you might want to consider giving the shop an opportunity to rectify the situation by supplying a replacement and some form of compensation (e.g. free kit). This could be less hassle than negotiating a full refund and finding another supplier.

But as I say you are perfectly within your rights to ask for your money back.


----------



## domtyler (26 Sep 2008)

Dannyg said:


> Satans budgie is correct, you have a right to get a full refund under the Sale of Good Act. The Citizens Advice website Adviceguide has more information on this.
> 
> If you want a refund the key thing is to act quickly and tell the shop that you are rejecting the bike as it is not fit for purpose.
> 
> ...



Why should negotiation come in to it? The OP has the law on his side as you have just pointed out.


----------



## ACS (26 Sep 2008)

The interpretation of consumer law can be difficult. First I would not advocate an all guns blazing attitude as presented elsewhere on this threat. Communication is the key. With your son (the consumer) present, talk to the owner of the shop, express your disappointment and ask how he plans to rectify the issue.

At this point do not make any reference to your rights in law. Negotiate a settlement in a rational and calm way. 

If you are not satisfied with his response leave the premises and write the owner of the shop a letter (keep a copy) reiterating your disappointment and advise him that you are considering rejecting the goods under whatever part of the Sale of Goods act you consider appropriate.

Give the owner at least 7 days to respond. If he does not, then this is the time to seek expert advice.

In this kind of matter you have to show that you have been reasonable and it is the owner that is being obstructive by not having full regard for your statutory right in law. Soft and calm always wins out in the end.


----------



## Ivan Ardon (26 Sep 2008)

B*ll*cks to that! Go and make a loud shouty fuss, preferably on a Saturday when they're busy. Give them one chance at doing the right thing, the go off on one.

As others have said, the bike isn't of merchantable quality and your son's entitled to a refund. You sound like you've had enough of them anyway and they've already shown they're not interested in honouring their responsibilities.

The worst that can happen is that you make an arse of yourself in the shop, and you have to resort to SB's softly softly approach. You don't lose your statutory rights by behaving bullishly in a shop.


----------



## postman (26 Sep 2008)

Do what i did send an e-mail to Giant in Nottingham.Details are on the Giant site on the net.Tell them your probs.Tell them what you intend and want doing.Get them to contact the dealer.And tell the dealer what you have done.I got my bottom bracket replaced at the shop of my choice and at no cost.


----------



## ACS (26 Sep 2008)

Just a point of clarification I am not advocating a softly softly approach at all. 

When considering this matter from a purely legal perspective the party with the complaint has to been seen in the eyes of the law to have been reasonable in his action. Would a deciding party, small claims court in this case, consider it reasonable that the complainant has ran into the shop concerned and has started to scream and shout in front of other customers, just to get his own way? Subject to a complaint it could be argued that this approach could be considered as a breach of the peace and therefore an arrestable offence.

If the screaming approach is adopted then the deciding party is immediately going to form an opinion that may not prove to be to the complainant’s advantage. Taking a measured, considered and rational approach adds creditability to the complaints case.

While running in and screaming at the top of your voice may give the complainant a great deal of short lived satisfaction it will do nothing but ensure that the shop owner attitude hardens to the situation, it will remain unresolved and the only course of action left to both parties is a remedy in law.

In perspective, the customer wants a serviceable bike without hindrance based on an acceptable level of service not an all out war with the shop owner.


----------



## Blue (26 Sep 2008)

satans budgie;412832[COLOR=black]While running in and screaming at the top of your voice may give the complainant a great deal of short lived satisfaction [B]it will do nothing but ensure that the shop owner attitude hardens to the situation said:


> .[/B][/COLOR]*
> . [/COLOR]*


*

I am not so sure about that - although you do make some fair points.

I once had a problem with a stereo system and wanted a full refund. I stood in the middle of the shop loudly asserting my rights until I was given the refund. I didn't actually scream - but it would have been a bit of a scene as I worked my way through every assistant until the manager was called. Mind you, I had an alternative supplier readily available *


----------



## domtyler (26 Sep 2008)

I am tending to agree with santa's budgie, go in and talk in hushed and apologetic tones but just make sure that the staff are aware that you have a baseball bat behind your back.


----------



## Jaded (26 Sep 2008)

Actually you don't necessarily have an absolute right to your money back. After a period of time the retailer can (in the first instance) offer to repair the item. It is a grey area and depends on the item. 

Get advice before doing anything stupid or anything that might damage your case.

Two weeks is a short period of time - however even in that time he could have done a LEJOG.


----------



## ACS (26 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> I am tending to agree with santa's budgie, go in and talk in hushed and apologetic tones but just make sure that the staff are aware that you have a baseball bat behind your back.



I am hoping that your reference to a baseball bat is an analogy for knowing your statutory rights and the obligations of the retailer and not a direct reference to violence. In fact, to be honest, I think I would prefer not to have your approval at all.


----------



## PaulB (26 Sep 2008)

Thanks for all the advice everyone. I showed him the thread to give him some ammunition but he's young and not fully versed in the ways of the world yet. There is no way I'd have let this happen to me and I come from a family who would indeed stand at counters on Saturday afternoons shouting the odds and making sure they got what they came in for. He is still of the opinion that his reasons for going to the LBS in the first place were sound ones and he would like to give them every chance. Havinbg said that, fired up with advice from on here, he's going in first thing in the morning and telling them just how unhappy he is at the service receieved so far and demanding a more rapid resolution to their problem or he will indeed ask for the full refund. I want to do it myself so much but realise you've got to let them stand on their own two feet. If only he'd been a bit more forceful in the first place and not accepted the dismissive way he was treated. But you can't turn the clock back, can you? Unless you are Cher or course.


----------



## Danny (26 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> Why should negotiation come in to it? The OP has the law on his side as you have just pointed out.


Negotiation may get you a better result or at least avoid the hassle of going elsewhere.

I know from personal experience that taking an overly tough line can sometimes backfire - even when they deserve it.


----------



## Blue (26 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> I am tending to agree with *santa's *budgie,



Oh, you are


----------



## ACS (26 Sep 2008)

Blue said:


> Oh, you are



Sometimes the only way of dealing with a person who could be considered as deliberately antagonistic is to ignore the obvious safe in the knowledge that everyone else thinks he is a .............................


----------



## domtyler (26 Sep 2008)

PaulB said:


> Thanks for all the advice everyone. I showed him the thread to give him some ammunition but he's young and not fully versed in the ways of the world yet. There is no way I'd have let this happen to me and I come from a family who would indeed stand at counters on Saturday afternoons shouting the odds and making sure they got what they came in for. He is still of the opinion that his reasons for going to the LBS in the first place were sound ones and he would like to give them every chance. Havinbg said that, fired up with advice from on here, he's going in first thing in the morning and telling them just how unhappy he is at the service receieved so far and demanding a more rapid resolution to their problem or he will indeed ask for the full refund. I want to do it myself so much but realise you've got to let them stand on their own two feet. If only he'd been a bit more forceful in the first place and not accepted the dismissive way he was treated. But you can't turn the clock back, can you? Unless you are Cher or course.



All true but you can't really expect too much from a seven year old.


----------



## PaulB (26 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> All true but you can't really expect too much from a seven year old.



If he was seven, that would make me.....a lot younger than I are now! It would also make me a cruel father for making him pay £550 for a bike!


----------



## yenrod (26 Sep 2008)

Go in the shop grab the b@stard by the scruff of the neck, knock 10x cans of sh@te outta him: then look him in the eye and say 'yuh give me my money back...

NOW

Think that should do it !


----------



## bonj2 (26 Sep 2008)

PaulB said:


> I just got my eldest son into cycling and ignoring better offers on t'internet, I persuaded him to buy from our LBS. He struggled to afford a Giant SCR but went ahead with it anyway. This was just two weeks ago. On a ride last Thursday, the front deraileur *went* and he couldn't drop it into the smaller chain ring. This was a massive problem as he had three huge (for him) hills to negotiate to get back home. He took the bike back to the shop only to be told the mechanic was on holiday and wouldn't be able to look at it until yesterday. My son patiently waited, keen to get back on his pride and joy now we are having some reasonable weather, to be told the shifter has *gone completely* but as it was under warranty from Giant, they could get a new one shipped to them but it would take until next Friday AT THE EARLIEST to get it sorted for him. I feel so bad for him as he struggled to pay for a bike which he now loves but within a few days it fails on him.
> 
> My question is, can he demand his money back as the bike is faulty? The shop have offered him very poor service and didn't even suggest a loaner until his is ready. Frankly, we are fed up of hearing their hard luck stories and I am about ready to burn my bridges with them and ask for a full refund and we'll buy elsewhere.



You say the mech "went" and the shifter has "gone completely" ... what _exactly_, do you mean by the terms "went" and "gone"?
You shouldn't have to, but it might be that it's a simple problem - just something to do with the fact that the bike's not been set up correctly - and the bike shop have _said_ that the shifters have "gone" when they don't really know that and/or are just saying that to stall so you'll have to wait till they get new ones (read: when that particular assistant isn't on shift).

If you want to go down the fix it route but still fancy getting a bit militant legally then I'm more than happy to fix it and provide you with an invoice for doing so that you can then claim off them.


----------



## dudi (26 Sep 2008)

I work inthe motor finance industry. and I would guess that the "merchantable quality" standpoint rings as true with a bike as it does with a car.
If we finance a car that has a problem with it, the customer has the right to demand a full refund, under the sale of goods act, as others have mentioned. 
I would go to the shop, and demand that refund


----------



## Jaded (26 Sep 2008)

They may well have a right to demand a refund, but that isn't the same as having a right to a refund.

In fact, cars is one area where getting a refund is as rare as hens teeth.

Read the post I made earlier and go get good advice. 

Take advice from an internet forum and you won't get a refund, but you will get a little time inside for GBH.


----------



## swee'pea99 (26 Sep 2008)

I have to say, having worked in shops quite a lot, my instinct is to agree with the earlier poster and suggest going in and being loudly and articulately unhappy at a time when they're busy. Make them look bad in front of lots of customers and potential customers and it makes sense - for them - to do the decent thing. If my experience is anything to go by, their primary concern is to avoid hassle and embarassment for them.


----------



## Jaded (26 Sep 2008)

If they are the only LBS in the area, or they are the only good LBS in the area then I can see no point in burning bridges by getting yourselves barred from there. 

If the shop is no good then you have nothing to lose from behaving like swee'pea99 suggests, although you should probably ask yourselves why you used the shop in the first place.

If their primary concern is to avoid hassle and embarrassment for themselves, then they've got their business all wrong. Choose another business.


----------



## Mortiroloboy (27 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> I am tending to agree with santa's budgie, go in and talk in hushed and apologetic tones but just make sure that the staff are aware that you have a baseball bat behind your back.



Aha, 
Excellent modern paraphrasing.
Gen. McArthur..."Speak softly, carry a big stick."

I think we need to know this shops identity, is it an independant or a chain outlet?


----------



## ASC1951 (27 Sep 2008)

Ivan Ardon said:


> B*ll*cks to that! Go and make a loud shouty fuss, preferably on a Saturday when they're busy. Give them one chance at doing the right thing, then go off on one..


Ah, yes. The George Bush School of Diplomacy - guaranteed to get the best results every time.

This may well be a defective part, not discoverable by the shop until the bike has been ridden, in which case ranting is hardly fair.

If someone complains about work I have done and makes a loud shouty fuss they get put right what I am obliged to put right and I try to make sure I don't work for them again. If they just point out the mistake, accept that we all make them (and we do), and calmly invite me to put it right, they get it put right plus some extras if I can and a better deal next time they employ me.


----------



## dudi (27 Sep 2008)

If it is a dispute over the quality of the product, defective component or not, the buyer has a right to refund, replacement or repair. and it is the buyers decision which they get.

The fact that it may be a defect with a specific component does not absolve the LBS of their responsibilities, it is their lookout to ensure that all the products that they sell are of a useable quality.

Having thought about it some more, given that you have already arranged for the LBS to repair the defective part, it would be expected to give them reasonable time to repair it. 

If of couse they cannot fix it in a reasonable time, or cannot fix it at all. you are ENTITLED to either a refund or a replacement.

I would not get a gressive with them, as that never gets you anywhere useful. be assertive.


----------



## Jaded (27 Sep 2008)

dudi said:


> If it is a dispute over the quality of the product, defective component or not, the buyer has a right to refund, replacement or repair. *and it is the buyers decision which they get*.



Would a car be replaced if it became faulty after 11 months and 28 days and 30,000 miles because the buyer decided it should be?


----------



## bonj2 (27 Sep 2008)

why dont' you just fix it rather than throwing the toys out the pram.


----------



## Tynan (27 Sep 2008)

suspect the shop is allowed to make it right, a tad unusual; these days in the disposable society, surprised they have to order in parts though

I'd certainly complain to Giant if only in the hope you'll get something, they sound likeliest to be the party at fault

happens sometimes, grin and bear it, my spanking new Fratello, assembled by shoot hot mechanics came with a warped chain ring, go figure, all sorted out now though with no need for shouting other than some firm expression of what i considered correct


----------



## dudi (27 Sep 2008)

Jaded said:


> Would a car be replaced if it became faulty after 11 months and 28 days and 30,000 miles because the buyer decided it should be?



well, due to the time the customer has had the goods, it depends what the problem is. 
but the kid has not had the bike just short of a year. 

If a car's gearbox broke after it's first outing (similar sort of situation) then yes. the buyer could easilly demand a refund on that product.


----------



## Jonathan M (27 Sep 2008)

My thoughts - if wheelset or frame broke,or significant component such as stem or handlebar, then I'd agree with pushing for a complete refund.

In terms of this problem, the OP describes a front mech problem that is then traced to the shifter. Both are replaceable parts (indeed, if Campag possibly repairable), and with regards to the delay, that might be Giant's fault,or it might not be - the shop may be dragging heels. Or is it that they are busy in the workshop, and that to turn the job around faster would mean defaulting on other customers work? I would go with the diplomatic solution first, and also contact Giant to let them know about issues with one of their retailers. 

In terms of a field repair on the day of the problem (a bit late, I know), then if it was a standard front mech removing the cable would have allowed the mech to spring into the inner position giving lower gears that may have helped the return journey somewhat for your son.


----------



## Jaded (27 Sep 2008)

dudi said:


> *well, due to the time the customer has had the goods*, _it depends what the problem is_.
> but the kid has not had the bike just short of a year.
> 
> If a car's gearbox broke after it's first outing (similar sort of situation) then yes. the buyer could easilly demand a refund on that product.



So, the buyer cannot choose if they get a refund then. Like I said in a post a few pages ago, and unlike your first post, there is not always an automatic right to a refund. 

The shop has said they will repair it and if they do then the lad has a bike that works that he paid for. It is quite likely that if he plays his cards right he could get something free for the trouble that he has been put to. 

If on the other hand he goes in guns blazing he risks alienating the shop and ultimately getting nowhere as he'll have to go and buy a bike somewhere else.


It's a grey area which is why I suggested getting advice, and not advice from an internet forum, where often the suggestions are wrong, or very wrong!


----------



## dudi (27 Sep 2008)

life is very black and white for you...


----------



## Jaded (27 Sep 2008)

dudi said:


> life is very black and white for you...



No, it is black and white for you. You said that customers have a right to a refund, based on your experience in a vehicle finance business. That is wrong.

I have said that it is a grey area and that people shouldn't take advice from a forum.


----------



## Jaded (27 Sep 2008)

dudi said:


> I work inthe motor finance industry. and I would guess that the "merchantable quality" standpoint rings as true with a bike as it does with a car.
> If we finance a car that has a problem with it, the customer has the right to demand a full refund, under the sale of goods act, as others have mentioned.
> I would go to the shop, and demand that refund



Just to remind you what you said.

Then you said 



> If it is a dispute over the quality of the product, defective component or not, the buyer has a right to refund, replacement or repair. and it is the buyers decision which they get.




Then you said 



> well, due to the time the customer has had the goods, it depends what the problem is.






He may have a right to a refund. He should take advice if he thinks he should get a refund, and the shop refuses. It's better than a baseball bat.


----------



## dudi (27 Sep 2008)

you obviousy mis-understood me. 
but never mind. 

A merchantable quality dispute, or MQ dispute as they're known can only happen within a very short time of takng ownership. as in this case. 

The scenario you painted was one that would be classed merely as a Warrantee claim

There is a vast difference between being sold a product that was no good to start with and a product where a component wears out slightly sooner than you might expect.

Not to put too blunt a point on it. if you were to go to Tesco and buy a loaf of bread that was in a paper bag, meaning you have not seen it. and then when you got it home and unwrapped it and it was mouldy, you would be well within your rights to return to the store straight away and expect a refund.
If, however you were to leave that bread for a few days, then open it and discover it was mouldy, that would be a different matter.


----------



## Jaded (28 Sep 2008)

dude,

That is exactly what I have been saying. There is no automatic right to a refund.

two weeks can be a long time in a bike's life. The LBS in question has no knowledge of what the bike has been exposed to in those two weeks. Possibly the fault arose after 1,600 miles of riding, possibly after none.

It is a grey area. 

Like I said.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (28 Sep 2008)

A few months ago I would have sided with though who say rant, shout, threaten, etc. Now I feel that arming yourself with your rights and speaking politely and quietly will get you much further and you may well get a MUCH better service in the future. Chuck with the CAB as to your rights (even though I am sure "Dudi" is 100% right). Best of luck and please keep us informed.


----------



## PaulB (29 Sep 2008)

Latest news is not at all good. My son was prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt and has just called them for an update only to be told it will be at least another two weeks before the problem is rectified! This will be five weeks he'll have been without it and less than two weeks with it. The shop's now telling him they have to have the opportunity to put it right but come on, he's ridden less than 100 miles on a brand new bike and it's broken. They don't have a leg to stand on, do they?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (29 Sep 2008)

I would get in touch with _*Trading Standards*_ and your local _*C.A.B*_. This does sound as though your sons rights are being ignored but this is (as so many others have pointed out) a very grey area in the law.

_PS_

A letter to your local newspaper might not go amiss as well.




PaulB said:


> Latest news is not at all good. My son was prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt and has just called them for an update only to be told it will be at least another two weeks before the problem is rectified! This will be five weeks he'll have been without it and less than two weeks with it. The shop's now telling him they have to have the opportunity to put it right but come on, he's ridden less than 100 miles on a brand new bike and it's broken. They don't have a leg to stand on, do they?


----------



## Ivan Ardon (29 Sep 2008)

PaulB said:


> Latest news is not at all good. My son was prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt and has just called them for an update only to be told it will be at least another two weeks before the problem is rectified!



How on earth do the LBS justify that? It's a new bike with standard off the shelf parts, not some vintage exotica.

Name and shame I say.


----------



## ACS (29 Sep 2008)

I have to agree. The stand taken by the LBS is no longer reasonable and it is time to start applying pressure. Make an appointment with the local CAB asking to speak to someone who specialises in consumer affairs and ask them to mediate. 

Depending on your financial position it may be worth obtaining a solicitor letter. Contact the Law Society to obtain the names of solicitors in your area that specialise in consumer law. (please note I am not a solicitor or advocate) In the long term this could be money well spent. Depending on the age of your son he may be entitled to legal advice under the legal aid scheme, but I think this may be a shot in the dark, but there is no harm in asking. It is a long time since I have had dealings with the Legal Aid Board and the rules may now be different. 

You, acting on your sons behalf, can write to the owner of the LBS and state that based on his reluctance to take your complaint seriously and provide a prompt solution you now wish to reject the goods as not being fit for purpose and intend to return the goods and obtain a full refund including any reasonable expenses you have incurred. If possible deliver the letter by hand, if not post by recorded delivery so he has to sign for it, eliminating the old ‘I never got the letter’ excuse.

In your letter, state the date and time you will be returning the goods and request information about how he is going to return your funds. (5 working days is considered acceptable in law again it is a question of being reasonable).

If he ignores your letter that is not a hinderace to you proceeding. Arrive at the LBS at the date and time specified with your goods in tip-top condition, have a copy of the letter in hand and ensure that anyone in the shop can over hear your conversation. No screaming or shouting, just a firm determination not to be fobbed off yet again. You are there for your money back that is your objective. Stick with it and stand firm. The longer you stand the more customers he will lose. It will become a question of who blinks first.

Indicate in your correspondence that should he elect not to honour your statutory rights by accepting the return of the faulty goods, you will be left with no option but to raise the matter in Small Claims Court (easy to do) seeking full restitution, including all expenses incurred and recompense for stress and torment. This is your fall back position and must be your next course of action if your visit to the LBS proves flawed.

IMO the LBS is trying it on, stretching the time so that they can avoid accepting rejected goods thereby avoiding a dispute between them and the manufacturer / supplier, he is trying not to be left with goods he cannot sell as new or return to the point of origin, he is looking at a loss on this transaction and he is trying to avoid taking the hit for it. He may offer a credit note. Politely decline as not a suitable solution to you and by doing this may negate any future legal rights at your disposal.

I appreciate that writing a letter is a pain but for legal purposes if it is not on paper it not relevant.


----------



## domtyler (29 Sep 2008)

You must be crazy, if this was me and mine it would have been sorted long ago. I don't think you are teaching your son a very good lesson here Paul, this particular bunch are taking him for a mug. Get back in there this afternoon and don't leave with your money.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (29 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> You must be crazy, if this was me and mine it would have been sorted long ago. I don't think you are teaching your son a very good lesson here Paul, this particular bunch are taking him for a mug. Get back in there this afternoon and don't leave with your money.



Can I take it that you are advising a highly confrontational approach. If this is the case I feel sorry for you and yours. Once you lower yourself to bullyboy tactics you loose the legal and moral high ground. *I was raised to think like you and it very nearly cost me my life.*


----------



## domtyler (29 Sep 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Can I take it that you are advising a highly confrontational approach. If this is the case I feel sorry for you and yours. Once you lower yourself to bullyboy tactics you loose the legal and moral high ground. *I was raised to think like you and it very nearly cost me my life.*



I don't want the legal or moral high ground, I want my f***ing money!


----------



## ACS (29 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> I don't want the legal or moral high ground, I want my f***ing money!



Just as well it’s not your problem then. IMO your advice is lacks creditability because it is based on emotion, its subjective not objective and lacks legal foundation. After all it is a matter of law.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (29 Sep 2008)

No doubt but there are ways and there are ways. An all guns blazing approach is the resort of a person who only knows _*one way*_ to resolve a problem and that is through either the use of, the threat of or the implication of _*violence*_.


domtyler said:


> I don't want the legal or moral high ground, I want my f***ing money!


----------



## domtyler (29 Sep 2008)

satans budgie said:


> Just as well its not your problem then.



I wouldn't have had this problem as I would not have ever let it progress to this stage.


----------



## domtyler (29 Sep 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No doubt but there are ways and there are ways. An all guns blazing approach is the resort of a person who only knows _*one way*_ to resolve a problem and that is through either the use of, the threat of or the implication of _*violence*_.



I don't use violence in any of the forms you mention in any area of life. Never needed to.


----------



## ACS (29 Sep 2008)

domtyler said:


> I don't use violence in any of the forms you mention in any area of life. Never needed to.



Yet by inference you accept the validity and condone the use of violence as an acceptable resolution. The law exists to protect the weak from the unjust. I have no doubt which camp you sit in.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (29 Sep 2008)

Well said :-)


satans budgie said:


> Yet by inference you accept the validity and condone the use of violence as an acceptable resolution. The law exists to protect the weak from the unjust. I have no doubt which camp you sit in.


----------



## PaulB (29 Sep 2008)

Calm down everyone. I just went in and picked up his bike. Due to unfortunate and unrelated problems of the shop's owner and staff, they have had a difficult time lately and what they did was to put on a Sora front shifter as a temporary fix until the Tiagra comes in to them from Giant (who the problem can be traced back to). So we have a temporary and adequate solution to the problem.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (29 Sep 2008)

Fantastic news. I am very pleased that a temporary resolution has been found :-)


PaulB said:


> Calm down everyone. I just went in and picked up his bike. Due to unfortunate and unrelated problems of the shop's owner and staff, they have had a difficult time lately and what they did was to put on a Sora front shifter as a temporary fix until the Tiagra comes in to them from Giant (who the problem can be traced back to). So we have a temporary and adequate solution to the problem.


----------



## domtyler (29 Sep 2008)

PaulB said:


> Calm down everyone. I just went in and picked up his bike. Due to unfortunate and unrelated problems of the shop's owner and staff, they have had a difficult time lately and what they did was to put on a Sora front shifter as a temporary fix until the Tiagra comes in to them from Giant (who the problem can be traced back to). So we have a temporary and adequate solution to the problem.



That sounds like a reasonable solution to me too.


----------



## 515mm (30 Sep 2008)

yenrod said:


> Go in the shop grab the b@stard by the scruff of the neck, knock 10x cans of sh@te outta him: then look him in the eye and say 'yuh give me my money back...
> 
> NOW
> 
> Think that should do it !



Not funny at all yenrod. I do have a sense of humour, but not when threatened with violence. Retract your post by the end of the day or I WILL report you.


----------



## 515mm (30 Sep 2008)

I would agree that five weeks to change a part that would take me (an amateur) 40 minutes to change, simply is not cricket. I would have asked about the possibility of a loaner at the time of the malfunction - and I would have been polite about it.

If it was a store that I, or any of my colleagues ran, then we'd ''sort out the customer first'' then worry about who pays for it later. If Giant didn't like it, we wouldn't sell their gear any more. If anyone in the future asked why, we'd tell them the truth. Our company have done this sort of thing several times in the past. (Yes, I do work in retail.) Manufacturers get the message pretty quickly when their sales team come round looking for orders and get only "No thanks. Nice product, rubbish customer service. We're not having your firm ruin our reputation."

It does sound as if your LBS have got the message now. As an aside, if your son had bought via the internet and the same fault occurred, how long would it have taken to get your problem solved I wonder?


----------



## ACS (30 Sep 2008)

515mm said:


> As an aside, if your son had bought via the internet and the same fault occurred, how long would it have taken to get your problem solved I wonder?



Distance Selling Regulations 2000  cover internet sales, as far as I can recall


----------



## Tynan (30 Sep 2008)

indeed, an internet sale is still a sale, the only people that might want to suggest otherwise would be internet sellers


----------



## Jaded (7 Oct 2008)

An internet sale has the added right that you can return the item within 7 days, no reason required.


----------



## mickle (8 Oct 2008)

515mm said:


> I would agree that five weeks to change a part that would take me (an amateur) 40 minutes to change, simply is not cricket. I would have asked about the possibility of a loaner at the time of the malfunction - and I would have been polite about it.
> 
> If it was a store that I, or any of my colleagues ran, then we'd ''sort out the customer first'' then worry about who pays for it later. If Giant didn't like it, we wouldn't sell their gear any more. If anyone in the future asked why, we'd tell them the truth. Our company have done this sort of thing several times in the past. (Yes, I do work in retail.) Manufacturers get the message pretty quickly when their sales team come round looking for orders and get only "No thanks. Nice product, rubbish customer service. We're not having your firm ruin our reputation."



Hear hear! The customer _is_ king. They should have fixed it on the spot and charged the distributor for the labour. It's standard practice. The trouble is, and this puts me in mind of Joe24's issues with the service quality at his Giant dealer, young persons just don't have the skills to deal with this sort of crap. DomT is right, (ow!) if an adult had gone in to resolve this they wouldn't have been so easily fobbed off.


----------

