Boardman hybrid, manufacturing defect in front forks-Warning

How old was the bike? less than 6 years?
Refer them to the sale of goods act 1979 sec 14
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54

However, it sounds like they may have acted within the law if they have given you a partial refund.

That's rotten luck for your son. I'm glad he wasn't hurt.

However, I'm amazed the shop accepted the 200-mile story. Riding so few miles on a bicycle is almost impossible, even in a few months.

I don't for a moment suggest that these things should snap even after heavy use over a mere three years, but I'm amazed they'd believe anyone would buy a bike and hardly swing a leg over it.

How far had he really ridden?

lindsaywill wrote:

Avoid Boardman Hybrid at all costs !!!
My son's Hybrid Pro front fork snapped in half under heavy braking recently, he was thrown off but luckily OK, could have been disastrous.
Even though bike had hardly been ridden (less than 200 miles) and after inspection they admitted it had not been mistreated, Halfords refused to cover the full cost of repair as it was just out of warranty !!

Nothing to do with avoiding Boardman Hybrids, or Halfords. It was simply a manufacturing defect. They seem to have given you a good offer considering the bike is 3 years old!

Matthewfalle wrote:

Jumped off many pavements in his "200 miles in 3 years" or riding had he? Or did the major structural failure on a fork that has sold thousands just happen, as they do.

Halfords were perfectly in their rights to not do anything as it was out of warranty - any shop/manufacturer would do exactly the same (and probably not offer anything at all unlike Halfords, which seems pretty nice of them).

As mentioned above Halford's and any other retailer in the UK has a duty to supply goods that are free from defect etc. - the maximum period is 6 years (5 in Scotland) and the minimum period depends on what is reasonable. Reasonability depends on the good in question, the quality, any extra information at time of sale etc. I am pretty sure that most people would agree that 3 years of very light use is not acceptable for a catastrophic failure of a front fork. The onus of proof would be on the complainant to show that there was a problem (before 6 months it is on the vendor to show there wasn't a pre-existing fault) - but most companies cave in after 4 or 5 emails and/or the mention that you will take up the argument on their twitter stream or facebook page.

Halford's have NO right to refuse to act because the manufacturer's warranty has expired - the purchaser and the vendor have a contract that is very strictly protected under the sales of goods act 1979 and has sod all to do with the warranty provided by a third party. Partial payment of repair is not one of the options - but partial refund would be. But seems like a done deal now.

Matthewfalle wrote:

Halfords were perfectly in their rights to not do anything as it was out of warranty - any shop/manufacturer would do exactly the same .

Is wrong, imatfaal is correct.

Matthewfalle wrote:

3 years of very light use - according to whom? Oh, the OP. So not very admissible in court then. Buty thank you for your legal talk posting.

Under 6 months old - its deemed faulty unless the shop can show otherwise. Over 6 months its for the purchaser to show it was faulty. Ultimately they make their case to a county court judge - e.g. district or circuit if its a small claim. If there were injuries attributed to the fault then it would typically go before a high court judge. Its all about the value being claimed. The court might order independent analysis from an expert if the parties agree, the cost is appropriate given the claim value etc. But its the judge who decides.

Manufacturer warranty is in addition to statutory rights and really sets out their contract with the shop. The manufacturer normally has no contractual relationship with the consumer, unless for example they are offering a warranty which might be transferable.

To summarise..

If the facts show that a fault was present at the point of sale, then a claim can be brought within the time limits posted by imatfaal. The fact that its out of manufacturer warranty simply means the retailer picks up the bill. The exposure of the retailer is Sale price - benefit. They would likely be aware of this when they agreed a partial contribution to the costs.