- This topic has 15 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
OK here goes, whats the consensus on spare parts guarantee’s ?
We sell parts over the counter and have done for years ! in this time we have had a guarantee policy of six months on parts sold. In the case of things like timers, modules we will not offer any warranty for obvious reasons.
Today we had a woman come back who’s brother bought a oven circa fan element 9 months ago and its gone down. They wanted it replaced under guarantee but they have no reciept to prove the date of purchase.
We have no way of knowing if the oven is working correctly i.e overheating, faulty cavity seals etc. The fact that we offer six months and not a years guarantee really got this customer and they wanted our suppliers details so they could take it up with them.
We declined to provide this the reason that the supplier will deal with trade only and that they as well as us have no way of dating the purchase of this item.
So the question is where do we stand and what guarantee period does the law say is normal ?
It seems to me that in a lot of cases even if our G/tee period was a year cusotmers would still try to create an overlap to suit them after all they are only human ! are they not ?
š
Re: Guarantee’s
From what I gather the part supplied must work for a reasonable amount of time and the cost of the item also comes into play. For example, you wouldn’t take a lightbulb back to Woolworths if it blew after 2 days, even more so if you didn’t have the receipt. Also, if the part is an expensive part you would expect a longer guarantee due to the cost of the item. Some of our suppliers only give a guarantee when the part is over Ā£100, and even then only for 6 months time IF the part is fitted to their standards. Other suppliers offer a years guarantee no questions asked. Peronally I believe you’re spot on with 6 months, you don’t know how it was installed, even if they bought it from you if there’s no proof of purchase.
Re: Guarantee’s
Hi Squadman
I recently spoke with trading standards with regards guarantees.
Apparently there is no legal requirement to provide a gtee. on anything! new goods or old. But there is a requirement to sell goods that are “fit for purpose” .
Basically if you give a gtee on a part then you should honor it, big BUT though, if they are fitting the part themselves, well this leaves you open to all sorts of problems mainly customer relations. Remember what Hotpoint print on there packets ” parts should only be fitted by a competent person” you will have to be judge and jury of your customers.If you give a 6 months Gtee on apart and they fetch it back after 9 months you could offer to get a replacement at say half price for good customer relations ( don’t forget you buy it at trade, but don’t give a gtee on replacement ) On the other hand if the customer is an ars*hole” :rolls: do what your instinct tells you š
I once had a guy buy a fridge stat of me only to return it to me the next day saying that it was faulty. On inspecting it I found that he had cut 12 inches of the phial because it was to long!! š³ Guaranteed ā My Ar*eā š
Mal
Re: Guarantee’s
I’m surprised he did’nt then rejoin the cut bit with a chocolate block !
We had that happen once, what a laugh we had šRe: Guarantee’s
I contacted Trading Standards on the subject, here is their reply: –
Trading Standards Office wrote:When a consumer purchases goods, they have rights under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, this states that the goods should be of satisfactory quality, fit for the purpose and as described. If the goods fail to meet this standard, then the consumer can hold the trader in breach of contract.
However, the trader will not be liable if the fault is a result of natural wear and tear or misuse. In your situation, you will only be liable if the parts sold are faulty because of a manufacturing defect. If a fault develops because the parts have been incorrectly fitted, then you would not be legally obliged to provide a remedy. Of course if the goods are not faulty, then the consumer has no automatic rights to a refund.
The Sale of Goods Act provides the consumer with statutory rights which cannot be excluded or restricted. The suggested wording for shop notices
should be something along the lines of: No refunds on spare parts that have been damaged as a result of the customers misuse. Followed by, this does not affect your statutory rights. May be more appropriate.I hope this has provided some clarification, but should you require further advice please feel free to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Tim Cutter
Advisory OfficerAlso, your customer can still demand a refund even if they cannot produce a receipt. Though it is interesting to note that a trader isn’t obliged to give a receipt for goods sold in the first place! šÆ
Working from home I occasionally sell the odd part at my front door (never give a receipt by the way š ). Last week I sold a guy a set of stats for a Hotpoint dryer. He came back the next day saying I’d sold him the wrong ones? I opened the box and found he’d bent the tags on one in an attempt to fit them. I refused a refund and instead sold him another pair. Two sales, one customer…brilliant…works for me 8)
Re: Guarantee’s
Martin,
Thats interesting but the statement from Trading Standards fails to specifiy a time scale in which the customer can return and demand anything !
Who is to say how long is reasonable ? Is six months reasonable, a year, maybe two years !
It is open ended terminology at best and in my mind and fails to provide a firm framework for the business retailer to work from. I would say that six months is reasonable during during which time is a part fails then you would replace it providing the customer produces some evidence of when they purchased it, after all it is the customer making the claim on you and not the other way. If on the other hand it is obvious that the part has been fitted incorrectly, or another fault existed or now at the time of the claim exsists then any guarantee period is void.
How can Trading Stadards and the associated legislation say that Yes the Customer has a guarantee which has no time scale and where the retailer offers any such guarantee they are not legally entitled to have reasonable proof of a purchase date.
This is only my view but I am looking at this as a customer and retailer and what is just and reasonable in my mind. Personally if I bought a product and could not prove my date of purcahse and it subsequently went wrong I would think it reasonable that the place from which that product came from would require proof of the purchase date.
In fact I saw a notice not two days ago in another whitegoods repairers shop clearly displayed stating that , Any Parts Purcahsed are not Guaranteed unless fitted by their engineers ! and no refunds or replacments would be considered.
That retailer has incidentally been trading for some 40 years and has operated under that policy even into this day and it just goes to show how ambiguos this trading standards business really is.
I have phoned trading standards recently about another matter on behalf of a friend involved in a dispute of some goods that they purchased and they were as much good as a chocolate fireplace and could tell me nothing that I did not already know about the subject that we discussed and most of those people employed on Trading Standards Customer Serive lines , you know where you call and provide a outline of the matter and two days later some hi-faluting individual decides to return your call and then proceeds to qoute from their screen display what you can and cannot do. Unless their is great publicity available or they have had a lot of complaints about a particular business and its been shoved upstairs they are I am afraid a toothless tiger.
Re: Guarantee’s
squadman wrote:Who is to say how long is reasonable ? Is six months reasonable, a year, maybe two years !
Selling spares across the counter like finished goods should have the standard 12 months warranty. That is standard business practice I think you will find and one the public is more than happy to associate with and accept.
However, the Sale of Goods Act stipulates that in law the retailer has a legal obligation towards any customer buying goods from his or her shop for a total of 6 (six) years from date of purchase. That the goods sold must be ‘fit for the purpose’ and have ‘a reasonable life expectancy based on for what purpose the goods were sold in the first place’.
In both cases the law is in place to protect the consumer and whilst it appears to go against the retailer, ultimately the whole purpose of these trading laws is to generate more customers for the retailer.
squadman wrote:In fact I saw a notice not two days ago in another whitegoods repairers shop clearly displayed stating that , Any Parts Purcahsed are not Guaranteed unless fitted by their engineers ! and no refunds or replacments would be considered.
We all know now that that sign has no legal standing in spite of it being in his shop for 40 years. If Trading Standards spot it hanging there I’m sure they will make comment. :rolls:
Trading Standards as you know only police the trading laws and are hard pressed in implimenting it. The Department of Trade and Industry ( http://www.dti.gov.uk/ ) are the guys that make them. I find Trading Standards for the most part are extremely helpful in many matters of this nature and to whom I always turn to for help should the need arise (as in this case) š
Re: Guarantee’s
Martin wrote:
However, the Sale of Goods Act stipulates that in law the retailer has a legal obligation towards any customer buying goods from his or her shop for a total of 6 (six) years from date of purchase. That the goods sold must be ‘fit for the purpose’ and have ‘a reasonable life expectancy based on for what purpose the goods were sold in the first placeGod help the retailer when joe public starts you use this policy! now that the quality of goods is falling to a deplorable state. We all know that the majority of white goods fail to come up to this criteria. Retailers should pressure the manufacturers to produce better goods that will stand up to this six year policy, sadly it will be the small retailer with very little clout who will suffer the most. š„
Re: Guarantee’s
That’s not in the retailer’s interest Mal.
They want to sell more to increase profit and, especially the box-shifting multiples, want goods to fail earlier rather than later. Higher failure rates also means that it’s easier to sell extended warranties.
Do the math, it’s not hard to work it out. š
Businesses that are local however and carry out their own repairs are a different kettle of fish altogether.
Customers have already sussed the six year thing, but it’s far from cut and dried. It’s very difficult to prove as, in the end, you can repair anything it’s only the availability of the parts and the cost that are in question. So from the customer’s perspective, is it worth a legal battle over a Ā£200 dishwasher? Answer is, not really.
On spares warranties, it’s a minefield. There are several issues to consider when dealing with spares and a warranty return…
Is it obvious that the damage has been caused by another failure or the customer not installing it correctly?
Is it worth the hassle arguing about it, especially on low cost, high margin spares?
Has it failed in a “reasonable” period?
Will the customer even bother to take it any further?
Even if TS get involved they are highly unlikely to do much of anything so long as you can reasonably explain your actions. Again, is it worth the hassle for them especially if they don’t get any complaints about you?
And there’s the rub with the 6 year thing as well, people don’t want to fund it themselves and TS simply can’t afford to fight all the legal battles so we’re in a situation where you can get away with a hell of a lot for a long period. It’s only when you become a constant pain, or the volume of complaints tips something somewhere that you would even be on the radar. This is why so many people get away with so much.
K.
Re: Guarantee’s
However, the Sale of Goods Act stipulates that in law the retailer has a legal obligation towards any customer buying goods from his or her shop for a total of 6 (six) years from date of purchase. That the goods sold must be ‘fit for the purpose’ and have ‘a reasonable life expectancy based on for what purpose the goods were sold in the first place’.
As I said previously it is up to the customer to prove their date of purchase and Martin’s enquires with TS shows that the legislation in place states that the retailer has a duty towards a customer for six years. If the customer is unable to prove when they made their purchase where does this leave this legislation ? the customer and retailer ??
Frankly I know its the stutory consumer law we are talking about here but lets face it this type of legislation seems to put the onus on the retailer and whilst I am all for protecting our rights there are areas of this particular law that you could drive and coach and horses through.
Are we really saying that if any of us sold a customer a fan element or Thermostat Kit that two years later when the customer returns to your place of business with either of these items in hand claiming guarantee and qouting this six year legislation that we are going to hand out new spares to them ? Can we then return these faulty spares to our suppliers for full credit or replacement and they in turn throw the parts back at the manufacturer or is it just the poor retailer that is expected to carry this ongoing loss.
For years we have had standard one year guarantees with the manufacturer being responsible after twenty eight days and for the most part that seemed to work well. Often or not in a situation where the manufacturer was responsible and there was a problem the customer could liase with the retailer and the retailer with the manufaturer to bring about a conclusion. Is it due to the fact that now the mass public are conditoned to a throw away mentality happy to pay as little as possible and then expect the item to have durabilty that the do gooders have implemented this daft set of rules, or more likely the EEC.
From some of the views here and eleswhere it seems to me that we all make our own policy on this and until like Ken has said someone wants to fight the corner this may continue to be the case.
Re: Guarantee’s
“If you want to dispute a claim by a consumer for a repair or replacement, remember that for the first six months it’s up to you to prove that the fault was not present at the time of sale. However, after six months it’s up to the consumer to prove that the goods were faulty when sold.”
Re: Guarantee’s
There’s a rub there Squadman.
As I understand it, the six year rule ONLY applies to a manufacturing defect and not failure through fair wear and tear. So using the oven element scenario, it is not reasonable to assume that if it fails within two years that there is a fault in the manufacture of that part. After all who can say how much use it has been given and whether that use is reasonable or not?
This rule has actually been around for quite a number of years from what I understand of it.
What changed was the emphasis. Before a few years back when it was changed, the onus was on the customer to prove the defect was due to a manufactruing defect, now the onus is on the retailer to say that there was none, or that the failure is a consequence of use.
People forget all the time that the manufacturer and their warranty has little, if any, bearing on the legal argument in this area (although I’m open to be corrected as this is my understanding of it), it is the retailer that is wholly responsible, not the manufacturer. The manufacturer’s warranty is in “addition to your statutory rights”, it does not serve as a replacement for them. So, when retailers try to pass off their responsibilities to the manufacturer’s service (such as seeking a replacement product), as they try that on all the time with me, they get a bit miffed when I throw it back in their face. It isn’t the manufacturer’s problem, its the retailers responsibility to authorise any exchanges etc.
What they are trying to do is lever the system by asking that the engineer authorise an exchange when in fact it’s not the engineer’s problem. He reports what he has to report, the retailer then decides what to do on behalf of his/her customer. It is not the engineer’s place to give an opinion unless asked by the person paying for the call, the retailer rarely pays fro a warranty call, but they do want the opinion so that they can justify seeking credit from the manufacturer.
What this shows is that, if you retail a part, then yes, you are the seller and you are responsible for the warranty even if your supplier offers none or goes out of business. You have no option other than to suck it up I’m afraid. Which is one of the primary reasons I’m always telling people not to cut their margins, allow for failures and even though it may smart a bit, you just have to put up with the cost of it.
K.
Re: Guarantee’s
Martin wrote:
Also, your customer can still demand a refund even if they cannot produce a receipt.A receipt isn’t strictly necessary, but they still have to prove the purchase in some way i.e a bank statement showing the cheque clearing or a credit card statement.
Re: Guarantee’s
……And to drag this thread along a bit more, there is also the question of the ‘Burden of Proof’. š
Just to confuse the issue, within the first 6 months from point of sale the retailer has to prove the goods he/she sold were not faulty. But after the first 6 months the purchaser has to prove that they were! š
Oh, and in Scotland the 6 year thing is only in fact 5 years north of the wee border (canny Scots eh?) š
Re: Guarantee’s
kwatt wrote:T
What this shows is that, if you retail a part, then yes, you are the seller and you are responsible for the warranty even if your supplier offers none or goes out of business. You have no option other than to suck it up I’m afraid. Which is one of the primary reasons I’m always telling people not to cut their margins, allow for failures and even though it may smart a bit, you just have to put up with the cost of it.K.
In theory the retailer should have the same redress as the customer. They bought goods which have not lasted a reasonable length of time. In reality though the wholesalers and manufacturers have power and leverage over most retailers – especially independants. As squadman says, it’s the retailer stuck in the middle that unfairly bears most of this burden.
The only power they have is to stop selling goods that give them grief but this isn’t always possible.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.