Advice Need - Halfords Poor Customer Service - Please Read!

morstar

Weejie54 wrote:

Statutory rights apply for 12 months but the 6 month acceptance period you refer to when mentioning rejecting goods does not exist.

Let me quote from the House of Commons Library:

In brief, if the consumer discovers an obvious fault with the good at any time within the first 6 months of purchase and it has not been caused by normal ‘wear and tear’ or misuse, the consumer may return the good to the shop they bought it from. The retailer has a responsibility under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 to put the matter right, either through a refund, replacement good or repair. The retailer cannot evade responsibility by referring the consumer to the manufacturer (even if there is a manufacturer’s guarantee or warranty). If the retailer offers to repair the good, they must do this within a reasonable time, at no additional cost to the consumer and without causing any significant inconvenience. Alternatively, if repair is impossible or unfeasible, the consumer should be offered a replacement good on a ‘like for like’ basis (and not simply the cheapest and most basic model). If repair or replacement is not offered, then the consumer can insist on a refund. However, any refund given may take account of any use the consumer may have had of the good since they took possession of it, and the purchase price reduced by an appropriate amount.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers ... -02239.pdf

I stand corrected on the time line. We always used to work on 12 months as a retailer so were offering above minimum.

HOWEVER: The point I was really tryng to make was specifically about rejection of goods. It would be very difficult to simply reject goods at nearly six months old. Rejection is based on the product being not fit for purpose and being entitled to walk away from the contract compensated. In this case that would be based on a fundamental design flaw stopping the bike from performing its function. One faulty component would not meet those criteria unless it occurred in the loosely defined acceptance period (which with a bike I would guess is around a week or so at best).

I was trying to point out that the retailer is within their rights to repair or replace and does not have to refund.

Lastly, the retailer is also within their rights to send the article away for repair and assessment. This is typically to the manufacturer or their representative. This is another area where customers can incorrectly perceive their rights are being infringed. They are not, because teh consumer is still dealing with the retailer. The retailer does only have a couple of weeks to turn this round though which can be tight.

Weejie54

HOWEVER: The point I was really tryng to make was specifically about rejection of goods. It would be very difficult to simply reject goods at nearly six months old. Rejection is based on the product being not fit for purpose and being entitled to walk away from the contract compensated. In this case that would be based on a fundamental design flaw stopping the bike from performing its function. One faulty component would not meet those criteria unless it occurred in the loosely defined acceptance period (which with a bike I would guess is around a week or so at best).

Rejection of goods is down to the goods being not fit for purpose at the time of purchase - . rejection is not what the OP is interested in. He was wanting the bike repaired and that would come under the passage I quoted earlier (you can can claim redress for five years after the complaint in Scotland!) - the six months that has been quoted by alfablue would be an assumption that the goods were faulty at the time of purchase and, like alfablue says, in the first six months after purchase, the burden of proof lies with the seller to show that the mech was not faulty.

morstar

Weejie54 wrote:

HOWEVER: The point I was really tryng to make was specifically about rejection of goods. It would be very difficult to simply reject goods at nearly six months old. Rejection is based on the product being not fit for purpose and being entitled to walk away from the contract compensated. In this case that would be based on a fundamental design flaw stopping the bike from performing its function. One faulty component would not meet those criteria unless it occurred in the loosely defined acceptance period (which with a bike I would guess is around a week or so at best).

Rejection of goods is down to the goods being not fit for purpose at the time of purchase - . rejection is not what the OP is interested in. He was wanting the bike repaired and that would come under the passage I quoted earlier (you can can claim redress for five years after the complaint in Scotland!) - the six months that has been quoted by alfablue would be an assumption that the goods were faulty at the time of purchase and, like alfablue says, in the first six months after purchase, the burden of proof lies with the seller to show that the mech was not faulty.

Agreed.

I picked up on the rejection point as somebody has suggested rejection of goods to the OP. That doesn't apply so my advice was to avoid it. I probably lost that point somewhere in my post.

Thick Tester

I would imagine any warranty only covers frame and forks anyway....

I know your type and it sounds like you're a pretty poor mechanic not willing to take responsibility for your own failings. A mech does not just 'Break' there will have been warning signs like missed shifts and skips that you have ignored.

The last time i saw a mech shear off a hanger it was on a entry level yank bike that looked like the cassette chain and jockey wheels had not been cleaned since the owner had bought it. When the owner punctured and turned the bike upside down on the bars and sadlle my worst fears were confirmed.,

Weejie54

The last time i saw a mech shear off a hanger

This one didn't shear off, apparently. It "buckled up".

jones1328

Thick Tester wrote:

I would imagine any warranty only covers frame and forks anyway....

I know your type and it sounds like you're a pretty poor mechanic not willing to take responsibility for your own failings. A mech does not just 'Break' there will have been warning signs like missed shifts and skips that you have ignored.

The last time i saw a mech shear off a hanger it was on a entry level yank bike that looked like the cassette chain and jockey wheels had not been cleaned since the owner had bought it. When the owner punctured and turned the bike upside down on the bars and sadlle my worst fears were confirmed.,

your not the guy who I dealt with at Halfords by any chance?

alfablue

Thick Tester wrote:

I would imagine any warranty only covers frame and forks anyway....

have you followed this discussion?

I know your type . . .

:roll:

Good username by the way

Thick Tester

alfablue wrote:

Thick Tester wrote:

I would imagine any warranty only covers frame and forks anyway....

have you followed this discussion?

I know your type . . .

:roll:

Good username by the way

You may tittle, and i may have skipped certain parts of the ' discussion' but you have to question the type of person who makes a purchase from halfrauds. They're the sort who think quality pasta comes with a findus label on a cardboard box....

KevGuinness

Thick Tester wrote:

alfablue wrote:

Thick Tester wrote:

I would imagine any warranty only covers frame and forks anyway....

have you followed this discussion?

I know your type . . .

:roll:

Good username by the way

You may tittle, and i may have skipped certain parts of the ' discussion' but you have to question the type of person who makes a purchase from halfrauds. They're the sort who think quality pasta comes with a findus label on a cardboard box....

you seem the type prone to broad generalisations.
Bike from halfords, never a problem, good service and utmost confidence in the guy from the shop.

mroli

Thick Tester wrote:

You may tittle, and i may have skipped certain parts of the ' discussion' but you have to question the type of person who makes a purchase from halfrauds. They're the sort who think quality pasta comes with a findus label on a cardboard box....

That's bollocks. I bought a bike from Halfords because it was cheap and on my cyclescheme - and £ for £, the boardman bikes are excellent value. I also put together my own bikes and do all my own servicing.

I by no means know it all, but that is just stupid prejudice.

softlad

any chance of some pics of the bike and damaged parts..?

jones1328

softlad wrote:

any chance of some pics of the bike and damaged parts..?

will take some pics tonight and post them on here.

jones1328

alright guys,

these are the pics I just took of the 'damage' to the bike that Halfords deemed sufficient enough to refuse to replace the parts under warranty.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/77931310@N ... 391011247/

alfablue

That is a complete joke!

Anyway, I told you what to do on page 1 of this thread, 6th post. Maybe you missed it.

Rockhopper

And how about some pics of whats actually broken?

softlad

the bike doesn't look 'crashed' to me...

jones1328

Rockhopper wrote:

And how about some pics of whats actually broken?

as requested

http://www.flickr.com/photos/77931310@N ... 391011247/

jones1328

alfablue wrote:

That is a complete joke!

Anyway, I told you what to do on page 1 of this thread, 6th post. Maybe you missed it.

alfablue,

I read your post. I've typed up a letter of complaint to Halfords which (along with copies of the receipts for new parts) I will be sending off on Monday asking for reimbursement.

will see what happens....

alfablue

jones1328 wrote:

alfablue wrote:

That is a complete joke!

Anyway, I told you what to do on page 1 of this thread, 6th post. Maybe you missed it.

alfablue,

I read your post. I've typed up a letter of complaint to Halfords which (along with copies of the receipts for new parts) I will be sending off on Monday asking for reimbursement.

will see what happens....

Well done.

Looking at the pics, I am thinking that maybe the chain broke first (one plate coming away rather than the chain completely parting company), this has caught in the rear mech and this has caused the mech to pull inwards towards the wheel and in the process bending the mech hanger.

The chain may have failed because it wasn't properly joined in the first place (as per my previous post, if this was the cause the onus is on the seller to prove this wasn't faulty).

In any case, the minuscule handlebar damage would not indicate that a collision caused the failure. If they are claiming the mech took a bang then presumably there would be a nasty scrape on the outer body (the bit that says 105).

desweller

alfablue wrote:

jones1328 wrote:

alfablue wrote:

That is a complete joke!

Anyway, I told you what to do on page 1 of this thread, 6th post. Maybe you missed it.

alfablue,

I read your post. I've typed up a letter of complaint to Halfords which (along with copies of the receipts for new parts) I will be sending off on Monday asking for reimbursement.

will see what happens....

Well done.

Looking at the pics, I am thinking that maybe the chain broke first (one plate coming away rather than the chain completely parting company), this has caught in the rear mech and this has caused the mech to pull inwards towards the wheel and in the process bending the mech hanger.

The chain may have failed because it wasn't properly joined in the first place (as per my previous post, if this was the cause the onus is on the seller to prove this wasn't faulty).

In any case, the minuscule handlebar damage would not indicate that a collision caused the failure. If they are claiming the mech took a bang then presumably there would be a nasty scrape on the outer body (the bit that says 105).

+1. Chain jamming in the mech seems top-of-the-pops to me too.

The only way the mech would track the chain is if a foreign object caused the chain to jam in the mech, or if parts of the chain separated and caught in the mech. And 10-speed chains are very, very far from being completely reliable, as the numerous threads on here will show.

It certainly doesn't look crashed. I've caused bigger nicks than that in my bar tape and brifters by leaning my bike against brick walls. And I frequently get pedal strike in fast bends, so my pedals are in far worse nick than the OP's!

Weejie54

Funny how such a 'major collision' has slightly ripped the bar tape but left not a mark on the brake lever.

Rockhopper

A broken chain like that could be caused by a ham fisted gear change,it could also be caused by an incorrectly joined or faulty chain.

I can't really see how a crash would cause that damage.

cougie

Really doesnt look like a crashed bike to me. Good luck with it.

bike junkie

alfablue wrote:

Its nothing to do with the warranty; if the bike is faulty, in law the assumption is that if this is within the first six months then it is presumed faulty at time of purchase. The onus is on the seller to prove that it wasn't faulty. You are entitled to reject the goods or have a repair at their cost. Write them a recorded delivery letter giving them seven days to arrange repair at their cost or say you will sue them (if they don't comply, then go ahead, its easy to do online, costs very little, and the fee is part of your claim https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome )

this is good advice. make sure you state in your letter you state what could of happened if you'd lost control of the bike as a result of their incompetance. all companies fear the health and saftey inspector. these guys should be brought to book. you could of been killed if you was flooring it in traffic. good luck mate.

STEFANOS4784

Pross wrote:

cougie wrote:

In 30 years of riding- I've never had a mech 'buckle'. I do shudder when I see cyclists putting their bikes down resting on their mechs - is that a possibility here ? Not everything is halfords fault.

You're right - the OP should blame Wiggle

Just when we thought it was safe to return to the forum :roll:

blackhands

cougie wrote:

In 30 years of riding- I've never had a mech 'buckle'. I do shudder when I see cyclists putting their bikes down resting on their mechs - is that a possibility here ? Not everything is halfords fault.

Same here in 55years of riding with derailleur gears. Mind you all sorts of things can cause the rear mech to apparently malfunction - not least is a stiff chain link when changing gear.

blackhands

Looking at the photos - you obviously have no idea how to look after your bike. NEVER rest the chainring on the ground as yoou can easily damage/bend the teeth.

jones1328

blackhands wrote:

Looking at the photos - you obviously have no idea how to look after your bike. NEVER rest the chainring on the ground as yoou can easily damage/bend the teeth.

It wasnt resting on the chainring, it was resting on the broken rear derailleuer.

jones1328

UPDATE: Bike was due to be repaired by my local Evans Cycles store today BUT the mech hanger supplied by Halfords (was told it was the correct one for my bike....) was, in fact, the incorrect one so I've ordered the correct one myself and rebooked the repair job for Thursday.