Warranty consumer rights?

Sambuca

Had an issue with the lacquer peeling off my carbon Lapierre Zesty, returned the bike to the shop who have contacted the UK importer and given me the news that the seatstay will be replaced but the chainstays are not available until "sometime next year"
The bike is 5 months old, this doesn't seem a reasonable amount of time to repair my bike so would I be legally entitled to a replacement frame from a 2013 model or a refund?
They cannot even give me a date as to when the chainstays will be available

The Rookie

Personally I'd say it's a good thing as you get to ride it for longer and do more damage before it gets reverted to as new!

You either reject under the sale of goods act, or see what compensation they will offer due to the poor 'service'.

Check the details of your warranty - what does it say?

supersonic

If they have admitted a fault with the product then they should repair or replace in a reasonable amount of time. I agree this is not a reasonable amount of time. You would be entitled to a refund, though it may be partial, taking into account the usage you have had. You could ask them to replace the whole frame, as the repair they are offering is unreasonable.

dmorton

This might also help - Guarantee, warranty and consumer rights are different things so you possibly have 3 ways of getting the problem fixed.

Guarantee

*A guarantee is usually free and is a promise about an item by the manufacturer or company
*It's a promise to sort out any problems with a product or service within a specific, fixed period of time
*Whether you paid for a guarantee or not, it is legally binding
*The guarantee must explain how you would make a claim in a way that is easy to understand
*It adds to your rights under consumer law
*It will take effect whether or not you have a warranty

Warranty

*A warranty acts like an insurance policy for which you must pay a premium - Sometimes a warranty is called an 'extended guarantee'
*May last longer than a guarantee and cover a wider range of problems
*A warranty is a legal contract
*The terms of the contract should be clear and fair
*Does not reduce your rights under consumer law
*A warranty can be in place with a guarantee

Consumer Rights

These are rights in law from the Sale of Goods act that cover you when purchasing products. If a fault occurs within 6 months it's the retailer's (not manufacturer) responsibility to prove that it's not a fault or offer a repair, replacement or possibly a refund. After 6 months the similar applies, although you have to prove it's a fault


Personally I'd ask for a frame swap and if that's not possible, a refund, quoting the relevant Sale of Goods act bits

FunBus

dmorton wrote:

Consumer Rights

These are rights in law from the Sale of Goods act that cover you when purchasing products. If a fault occurs within 6 months it's the retailer's (not manufacturer) responsibility to prove that it's not a fault or offer a repair, replacement or possibly a refund. After 6 months the similar applies, although you have to prove it's a fault

Where have you seen this information? All bikes come with a 'manufacturer's warranty'.....it is never left to the retailer to cover the cost or even make the call if a frame has failed under warranty. All warranty claims revert back to the UK distributor/importer (as stated above) and they then in turn claim costs back from the factory (or absorb the cost if their cover with the factory has expired).

Also, as for quoting rights and laws, can you not just discuss it with the shop like a civilised person? Too many people think they know the law and should get everything they want 'or else!!'.....I personally would make more of an effort to sort your claim if you didnt spout out legal stuff.

cooldad

It isn't his claim or bike or anything. Calm down.

supersonic

Warranty and your rights under the SOGA are two very different things.

alfablue

Just for the benefit of other readers I offer a few thoughts...

FunBus wrote:

Where have you seen this information? All bikes come with a 'manufacturer's warranty'.....

As suggested above, the Warranty is separate from your legal rights as a consumer, your consumer rights give you better protection than the warranty

it is never left to the retailer to cover the cost or even make the call if a frame has failed under warranty. All warranty claims revert back to the UK distributor/importer (as stated above) and they then in turn claim costs back from the factory (or absorb the cost if their cover with the factory has expired).

yes, warranty claims do revert to the distributor, but any consumer is foolish to allow the seller to use this route. When you buy something, your contract is with the seller (the distributor or manufacturer has no legal duty to you as a consumer, other than the terms of their warranty, which may well be useless). The retailer has the duty to offer you a remedy, if you allow them to use the warranty you are really giving away your rights. Where warranties may be useful is perhaps if they apply over an extended period; for example your three year old Trek frame cracks. Trek, for example, apparently have a lifetime warranty on frames, so if they honour the warranty, you get a new frame (the reality may well be that they have a variety of reasons why the warranty won't apply in your case, and you have little possibility of challenging their decision successfully).

Also, as for quoting rights and laws, can you not just discuss it with the shop like a civilised person? Too many people think they know the law and should get everything they want 'or else!!'

Well you clearly don't know the law. If more consumers and retailers did know the law, customer experience and service would be a whole lot better

.....I personally would make more of an effort to sort your claim if you didn’t spout out legal stuff.

It's about using "gears" - always ask nicely and politely; if the retailer doesn't get it (i.e. their legal obligations), then maybe tell them what the law is, nicely, trying to keep a smile. If they dig their heels in (happens too often unfortunately, because many retailers are ill-informed) then say what your rights are, more assertively (but still nicely). If this still doesn't work, write a recorded delivery letter to them saying you are rejecting the goods because they are faulty / not fit for purpose or whatever applies, and ask for a refund within 7 days. After that, if no response (this step has nearly always delivered the result for me), then write a letter "notice prior to action" offering them a further 7 days to refund or you make a small claims court claim (very easy to do online, low fees which you recoup in your claim). If still no result, submit the claim, sit back and collect (assuming you have a case).

Almost invariably even the most obtuse retailer will settle at a point before you need to make a claim, the notice prior to action usually does it.

With a good retailer, "1st gear" will work, you explain the problem nicely and they sort it out promptly without question. Customer is happy and shops there again, retailer is happy as reputation and business grows. There are many good retailers, but a few rogues also. Sometimes the "rogues" are really about poorly trained shop floor staff, though a good retailer will ensure they are familiar with the law.

dmorton

FunBus, what I've said about the difference between guarantee, warranty and statutory consumer rights is correct. However you do have a point with this, something I forgot to add.

FunBus wrote:

Also, as for quoting rights and laws, can you not just discuss it with the shop like a civilised person? Too many people think they know the law and should get everything they want 'or else!!'.....I personally would make more of an effort to sort your claim if you didnt spout out legal stuff.

I agree, going in all guns blazing quoting the Sale of Goods act is not the way to start to progress things. A chat with the retailer would normally sort this out. But I do know the law and the OP has been fobbed off in this case, they have rights they can exercise to get this sorted. The time scale for a replacement cannot be deemed reasonable, in fact there has been no time scale given.

dmorton

FunBus wrote:

Where have you seen this information?

FYI

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-goods/understanding-the-sale-of-goods-act/your-rights/

Sambuca

Just to update on - after writing several times to the head office of the bike shop in question they have now suddenly received the part which wasn't available until next year but it is blank in colour and dosent have the correct graphics and paint scheme to match my bike. They are offering a £50 voucher to compensate me for the fact that it dosent match my bike and because the correct colour one will never be available but I don't think this is acceptable on something that cost nearly £3000, the law says it has to be a 'like for like' repair or replacement, my next stage is small claims court- anyone had experience with shops trying to palm you off with blank colour parts?

cooldad

I'd say it is like for like - it's the right part and will do the job. The only issue is cosmetic. Have it painted. Or get them to do it instead of a voucher.

supersonic

Sambuca wrote:

Just to update on - after writing several times to the head office of the bike shop in question they have now suddenly received the part which wasn't available until next year but it is blank in colour and dosent have the correct graphics and paint scheme to match my bike. They are offering a £50 voucher to compensate me for the fact that it dosent match my bike and because the correct colour one will never be available but I don't think this is acceptable on something that cost nearly £3000, the law says it has to be a 'like for like' repair or replacement, my next stage is small claims court- anyone had experience with shops trying to palm you off with blank colour parts?

Reject the offer first, citing your reasons. Though I am not sure a court will rule in your favour if you took it further, graphic can be a grey area.

Thewaylander

At this point i would jsut ask for a matching respray from the bike shop, they probably know a decent local sprayer.

diy

Take supersonic's advice on both the elements of law that are relevant and their proposed offer of remedy. I don't have time to explain why the warranty is irrelevant.

There is no requirement for it to be like for like, its simply that the remedy must not be disproportionately costly. If they haven't got a matching part and cannot paint up the part, then I think they either cough up a reasonable adjustment to the loss of value or they replace the frame. I think a court would see 5% as being reasonable.

reject the proposed remedy as not being acceptable. Alternatively reject the whole bike - benefit of use.

mrmonkfinger

They would seem to have had a fair crack at supplying you a replacement. Maybe you can negotiate a paint job with the shop.

Although personally, I'd take the £50.