Should/can he demand his money back?

[PaulB]

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]

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]

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

 

[ACS]

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]

Name and shame

 

[Danny]

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]

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.

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

 

[ACS]

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]

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]

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]

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]

.[/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]

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]

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]

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.