6 Week old bent/faulty Cube frame... Advice needed

diy

Because there is a difference between remedy and rescission.

You have a right to reject goods and rescind your contract if they are not to contract (statutory rights are part of the contract - fit for purpose, as described, free from defect etc.) Provided you have not accepted the goods.

You are generally deemed to have accepted the goods after a short period of time from receiving them even if you don't actually confirm acceptance. At this point you no longer have rescission as a remedy (contract cancelled give me my money back). There is no limit in time as it depends on the type of goods, but a max of 4-6 weeks is about all you could hope for. If you made the retailer aware of the fault very quickly then you have preserved your right as you are able to hold on to that right while exploring remedy with the seller (all common sense stuff really - try to resolve disputes etc.)

If you cannot resolve, you can still exercise that right that you preserved.

Even if you did accept the goods due to delays in reporting the fault, you still have the right to get a refund if the retailer cannot resolve the problem. Its really important to understand that at no point does the manufacturer have any role in this. If the retailer is unable to fix, he re-open's the consumers right to cancel.

The bit where SS and I appear at odds (and I'm not sure we are its just in the detail) is that the retailer doesn't release his obligation to remedy by asking the manufacturer to fix.

The fact that the retailer has had the bike twice now to fix, opens him up to a claim of failure to fix - giving the consumer a right to rescind the contract.

As I said: Its really important to understand that at no point does the manufacturer have any role in this.

supersonic

The bit where SS and I appear at odds (and I'm not sure we are its just in the detail) is that the retailer doesn't release his obligation to remedy by asking the manufacturer to fix.

I said the manufacturer is examing the goods (as the retailer needs proof as they have not accepted a manufacturing fault) to see if they have an inherant fault.

The fact that the retailer has had the bike twice now to fix, opens him up to a claim of failure to fix - giving the consumer a right to rescind the contract.

But the cause of the problem has not been established. If the consumer has damaged the bike, the retailer does not have to fix it.

Faults do not sometimes manifest themselves for a long time, like a sudden frame snappage. It is unreasonable to expect the retailer to spot a fault that cannot be seen

From what I have read the problem was spotted after the 4 week check, and was not there at 4 week check. No frame rubbing or frame gouging was reported by either party then.

diy

supersonic wrote:

If the consumer has damaged the bike, the retailer does not have to fix it.

agree with that bit. So long as the damage was not a consequence of a fault.

The rest is not relevant to the consumer. I do agree that consumer law is a bit of a pain for the retailer, but these are the rules which they choose to operate under, by selling to consumers.

GSP1984

NEWS - Cube are sending a replacement frame under warranty.

Not times frames yet but I have other bikes to ride... just glad it's getting sorted,

mattyg2004

I dont see why the manufacturer is involved. Your contract is with the retailer NOT the manufacturer. You could kick up a massive fuss. The retailer has seen the fault and should replace/refund. Your contract is with them their contract is with the manufacturer.

It is down to them to get a refund from the manufacturer after they have sorted you out.

Its the retailer who should make a judgement call and if they get it wrong then thats their hard luck thats what they get paid for. If the problem always gets thrown back at the manufacturer then why dont we buy direct

Glad to see its getting sorted though.

supersonic

The retailer has seen the fault and should replace/refund.

The retailer did not accept that there was an inherant manufacuring fault at first, present at the time of purchase. They have to prove that is the case. They didn't. Now they have no choice but to repair/replace, as the goods have been deemed to have this fault.

Good news for the OP!

RevellRider

mattyg2004 wrote:

I dont see why the manufacturer is involved. Your contract is with the retailer NOT the manufacturer.

If the manufacturer isn't involved, where does the replacement frame come from? The OP took the bike back to where he purchased it from and the retailer has done what they are supposed to do. A good result all round.

stubs

Good result Cube seem to have a good reputation for customer service

mattyg2004

Yeah its a good result.

But you buy a toaster from comet its faulty and you take it back. What would happen if Comet said oh we've got to send it back to the manufacturer.

There would be major kick offs. it may be a different Product but the rules are the same.

We seem to relinquish our rights with either the size of the object or the more we spend.

GSP1984

I guess the toaster aspect is quite right, this is no different.

A refund or even a credit note would have been the best outcome, and if I really wanted to be awkward and fight for it I'm sure I could get it after some fallings out.

I just dont have the time to go down that route at the moment. Of course if another two weeks go by with no sign of the new frame, then I may start getting a bit more involved now they have clearly admitted some form of fault.

diy

mattyg2004

Totally agree, retailers bring in the manufacturer as a party as a matter of course, because they don't want to be exposed. They wont want to accept something is faulty only to have the manufacturer argue that its not.

The simple facts are: They are and should be exposed. If they do not wish to be, they should seek to have back to back contracts with their distributors. They don't, they accept the terms imposed on them and then seek to impose those terms on the consumer.

Can't blame them for trying, as most people will accept what they are told.

I would check the bike over very carefully once its been built up, I have no experience with this LBS, but some I wouldn't trust to do a frame transplant, even though every LBS should know how to do this properly.

GSP1984

diy wrote:

mattyg2004

I would check the bike over very carefully once its been built up, I have no experience with this LBS, but some I wouldn't trust to do a frame transplant, even though every LBS should know how to do this properly.

In fairness I wouldn't be the best person to check it over

It's J E James in chesterfield, it did go in for it's first service and come out with worse gears than it went in with though so I am slightly worried.

stubs

GSP1984 wrote:

diy wrote:

mattyg2004

I would check the bike over very carefully once its been built up, I have no experience with this LBS, but some I wouldn't trust to do a frame transplant, even though every LBS should know how to do this properly.

In fairness I wouldn't be the best person to check it over

It's J E James in chesterfield, it did go in for it's first service and come out with worse gears than it went in with though so I am slightly worried.

Must be someone on this forum near Mansfield could check it out for you. Or better still read the Park tools maintenance website or all the FAQs on this forum and go over your bike yourself its not hard once you get going. You will make a couple of cock ups but then we all did and theres nothing better than ridng a bike you have worked on yourself. Basic maintenance can be done with a decent multi tool, a bottle of lube and a roll of kitchen paper towels.

supersonic

Whether is a toaster, a bike, it makes no difference: if the retailer has not accepted an inherant manufacturing fault, they have to prove it. They are not doing anything wrong here, and doing nothing against the SOGA.

However the goods in this case are faulty (and believe me, I have sent plenty of goods away in the past to be examined, including frames for them to come back not faulty), so the OPs rights are a replacement or repair.

ogre

Moral - don't buy from JEJames

cooldad

ogre wrote:

Moral - don't buy from JEJames

Dumb baseless statement.

ogre

have you ever been in one?

cooldad

In a dumb baseless statement?
Not in this dimension.

Daz555

GSP1984 wrote:

Where do I stand with this, what are my rights with it being a 6 week old bike and what sort of solution response should I expect?

Brand new, no evidence of abuse. Demand a replacement frame.

mattyg2004

I've just had a quick look at SOGA and it states that a retailer can ask If its ok to send away but it doesn't state what should happen IF the customer refuses. meh damn law as grey as it comes.


To be honest if there was a chip in the paint or a dent then yes send it away but if not should have been a straight swap.


However having said all that its getting sorted for the OP.

diy

Are you sure you were not reading a guide to the SOGA? The obligation is minimum inconvenience at one end and not disproportionately costly at the other. There is nothing that allows the retailer to include a 3rd party.

mattyg2004

Nope I could have been reading anything. Its been one of those days.

So going back to square one.

OP's bike not working as expected

OP could have taken back to retailer and demanded money back or replacement and after showing the retailer the Issue retailer has no grounds to refuse.
The retailer can ask if its ok to send to manufacturer but OP could refuse.


In practise what the retailer did for the OP is what is likely to happen

Its good that as a buyer we have more protection but it must suck as a retailer. Probably pushes up retail prices too. That we will never know

alfablue

mattyg2004 wrote:

Its good that as a buyer we have more protection but it must suck as a retailer. Probably pushes up retail prices too. That we will never know

The alternative would be cheaper bikes but unhappier consumers, or worse, consumers having to sort the problems out at their own cost, or worse still, riding dangerous bikes which kill them!

In my view, if you can't stand the heat (upholding the legal requirements of any business you are involved in) get out of the kitchen (bike retailing/any retailing/any business activity).

cooldad

alfablue wrote:

mattyg2004 wrote:

Its good that as a buyer we have more protection but it must suck as a retailer. Probably pushes up retail prices too. That we will never know

The alternative would be cheaper bikes but unhappier consumers, or worse, consumers having to sort the problems out at their own cost, or worse still, riding dangerous bikes which kill them! In my view, if you can't stand the heat (upholding the legal requirements of any business you are involved in) get out of the kitchen (bike retailing/any retailing/any business activity).

Like BSO's from Asda etc. Should be a law against it.

alfablue

yes

supersonic

OP's bike not working as expected

OP could have taken back to retailer and demanded money back or replacement and after showing the retailer the Issue retailer has no grounds to refuse.

But if the OP had caused the fault then they have no grounds for this course. If the goods have deemed to be accepted, even if faulty, the retailer does not have to offer a refund, but repair or replacement. As DIY says after, this has to be done in reasonable time and at no cost to the customer.

This case has always been about proving the goods has a manufacturing fault. JE James failed to prove otherwise, and so I hope for the OPs sake the matter is dealt with swiftly and satisfactorily.

diy

IMO the OP had the right to a refund.

GSP1984

In fairness I have since requested a credit note on the grounds that I've lost confidence in the product and the fact that it was not fit for purpose and arguably dangerous.

To add to the dilemma Cube have sent a 2012 frame, which is all well and good but if and when I come to sell it the buyer will be questioning why the wrong forks and many other bits are fitted if they are clued up... Plus the whole being rebuilt thing is playing on my mind.

I need to make my mind up in the next hour or so whether to push for the credit note, or accept the 2012 frame being built up.

welshkev

GSP1984 wrote:

In fairness I have since requested a credit note on the grounds that I've lost confidence in the product and the fact that it was not fit for purpose and arguably dangerous.

To add to the dilemma Cube have sent a 2012 frame, which is all well and good but if and when I come to sell it the buyer will be questioning why the wrong forks and many other bits are fitted if they are clued up... Plus the whole being rebuilt thing is playing on my mind.

I need to make my mind up in the next hour or so whether to push for the credit note, or accept the 2012 frame being built up.

accept the frame! you get a brand new frame and when/if you come to sell it you just state it was a replacement after a faulty 2011 frame!!

Red.Devil.Ghost

The key to all of this is customer service, whatever the business they are in.

As a slight aside, I ordered a new Macbook Air. When I turned it on, the backlight wasnt working. Then it started, then stopped again. So I phoned Apple and they were going to talk me through some stuff to see if it would rectify the problemt. I very politely said that I wanted it replaced, not fixed, as it was brand new and expensive. They immediately accepted this, put me through to the right people. A new one was dispatched the same day, and UPS have already made contact to collect the faulty one.

That, to me, is great customer service. I accept that, unfortunately, manufacturing processes of any kind are not completely free of faults. But Apple dealt with this so quickly and efficiently, if anyone asks my opinion on the Macbook Air, I will praise the customer service and not focus on the fact that I received a faulty prouct.

The point of this - I can see why JE James sent it back, but in reality they would have done a lot better to just accept that there was a fault, replace the frame and have the bike back to him within a reasonable time, say 48 hours. Granted, this is slightly different in that I dealt with Apple direct and not through a retailer. He would then have recommended JE James to other people, as opposed to his opinion now which will likely be something along the lines of average customer service at best.

The issue of selling the bike on isnt a real concern, but I would say if you're gut feeling is a lack of confidence in the bike, stick by your decision, as you may be afraid or worried about riding it to its potential. If the doubt has only been put in your mind but what you have read here, its a more difficult choice to make.