Page 14 - Computeractive - January 2, 2018 UK

C o n s u m e r a c t iv e

Can I r eturn wrong

goods s ent t o m e? Can a c ompany f orce ano t her r epair

Q I b ought a L inx 810 W indows 10 on me for a d ifferent f ault?
tablet from Amazon Marketplace
trader GSM M . I t ried t o u pdate Y o u t ook u p m y c ase in
the o perating system but wasn’t able to. Q July last y ear ( Issue 4 74)
Linx told me I w as sent the w rong tablet. on the p roblems I ’d been
But G SM M a nd Amazon say t hat b ecause having with my HP laptop bought
90 days have passed since purchase I’m from Currys. Although it was
too l ate t o r eturn i t. What can I d o? initially fi xed, the l aptop’s b een
John MacDonald sent back f or repair three t imes
since then. E ach t ime I a sked for a
A John can m ake a c laim w ith refund C urrys r efused, s aying
t o c arry out the
they were allowed
Amazon. F ollowing our
intervention, i t h as agreed to other r epairs b ecause each time
extend the 9 0 d ays n ormally given b y i ts the f ault was d ifferent. Is this
‘A -to-z’ guarantee ( www.snipca.com/ allowed?
26295). He’s entitled to a f ull refund from Kelvin Jones change in the l aw (although two y ears
the s eller b ecause, a s L inx h as confirmed, should be long e nough for t he message
he was s ent t he wrong t ablet. GSM M No it’s not. Th e c ycle of repeat to sink in!). If this first repair fails,
either posted i ncorrect i nfo i n t he product A repairs c onsumers h ad to you’re entitled to a f ull refund within
description, o r s ent J ohn t he wrong t ablet. endure under t he Sale of Goods the fi rst s ix months and a p ro rata one
This m ay have been a n i nnocent m istake, Act w as ended b y t he Consumer Rights after. K elvin h as had s ome u se from the
but it’s still incompetent. Act, introduced in October 2 015. During laptop, s o l egally he can’t expect t he
We’ve e xplained t his t o G SM M, but the fi rst 3 0 d ays y ou’re e ntitled t o a f ull entire cost back.
haven’t h eard back. The company , based refund for a n i nherent f ault. A fter this We’ve c ontacted Dixons Carphone
in Barking, has a g ood customer r ating – the r etailer i s a llowed to carry out one W a rehouse, C urrys’ parent company ,
93 per c ent p ositive o ver t he past 12 repair or offer a r eplacement. A nd we about this case, e xplaining that Kelvin
months, b ased o n 2 75 reviews (www. mean only one repair. I t d oesn’t matter is due a r efund, or a n ew model. W e’ll
snipca.com/26294). This r ises to 96 per whether t he second, t hird or politely mention that it would b e l ovely
cent for G SM M’s ‘ lifetime’ on Amazon, umpteenth f ault is different to the fi rst. if he received a b etter l aptop a s a n
based o n o ver 4 ,200 reviews. W e’re It’s disappointing that Currys d oesn’t apology f or the h assle h e’s
hopeful that, with a h ealthy know this, b ut we’re s eeing a l ot of put up with. W e’ll let
reputation to maintain, cases like t his, so perhaps r etailers you k now i f o ur powers
the c ompany will see need to better train t heir staff about the of persuasion work.
sense and r efund J ohn.

Can I g et a r efund a fter three printers broke?

Q I b ought a W F-5690 printer or replacement after the fi rst
(pictured) f rom
E pson for £ 309
30 days. B ut when the fi rst
in May . The first printer became replacement was f ound to be Martin actually paid £234
faulty a fter six w eeks but Epson refused a faulty it should have offered because he had a £ 75 cashback
refund s aying i t w as allowed t o r eplace it. Martin a f ull refund. B ecause deal, m eaning Epson needn’t
I’ve now h ad three replacements b ecause it didn’t, f ailing t herefore to refund the f ull price o f £ 309.
one m inute E pson says I c an have a r efund; comply with the C onsumer However, he says the p roblems
then I c an’t. I ’m going m ad – p lease help! Rights Act, we think E pson owes Martin a led t o h im “wasting” m ore t han £ 75 on
Martin Day full refund. I n n ormal circumstances, Epson inkjet cartridges. He’s legally
after six m onths a r etailer w ould be able entitled to ask E pson for t his, and s aid a
A Such inconsistency c ould drive to deduct some m oney from a r efund t o refund of £309 will cover
it. E pson is “escalating”
l ong t he customer h ad used
any c ustomer t o t he edge of
reflect how
insanity. L ike C urrys i n t he case the i tem ( as in the C urrys c ase). Martin’s case, s o w e h ope
above, Epson is legally a llowed one r epair There may b e a p roblem though. to have an update soon.
14 20 December 2017 – 2 J anuary 2018