Exchange/refund policy

philjayj · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:02

Hi, I just need a bit of advice really.

My Mum purchased a Samsung mobile phone from the Liverpool branch of ***. She purchased the phone in December 2008 for £120. The phone simply stopped working last week, for whatever reason we don't know.

We took the phone back to the shop and they confirmed it was faulty. However, rather than refunding the whole amount paid, they only refunded the depreciated value, which was £87. We asked for a replacement too, but they couldn't do that because there was no replacement phone about.

Basically, what I want to know is, is the shop correct in doing this? Surely if the phone was faulty they should be refunding the £120????

Many thanks

Phil

Edit: Oh, and my mum does still have the full receipt, packaging and accessories etc.

JBuk · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:03

They are right to offer a reduced amount , she has had the benefit of the phone for over 6 months

TheCenturion · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:05

This thread will be deleted, start a thread and don't put the competitor's name.

Also, I think that to get the full amount you have to return it in the 28 day period or whatever, otherwise you might have been able to send it to samsung

fiveub · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:05

Because it is over a few months, I think they have a right to give you the lower cost value as value would obviously had gone down as time has gone by, and how much use it has had. I could be wrong, and I would not know how they would work out the value of it now. Check with Samsung to see if it is under any form of warranty, as you never know, it might be.

philjayj · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:11

Thanks for all the quick replies.

Greenlizard0 · 2 Aug 2009 at 11:14

Aye, I'd check with Samsung and see what warranty they can offer you.

I know the chain of stores in question they can be a bit tight.

Rotty · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:20

surely they have to offer a repair/replacement at no cost under warranty

brummie · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:24

Rotty said:
surely they have to offer a repair/replacement at no cost under warranty

yes or refund the reciept amount. Its not your fault. :eek:

Rotty · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:25

brummie said:
yes or refund the reciept amount. Its not your fault.

as far as I know the depreciated value could only come into play if it was an insurance claim and that was written into the terms

brummie · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:30

Yes. You can expect a replacement of an equivalent or above. No need to have any money back. they are trying it on and probably breaking the law.

JBuk · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:34

brummie said:
Yes. You can expect a replacement of an equivalent or above. No need to have any money back. they are trying it on and probably breaking the law.

It may cost more than the value of the phone to have it repaired, they don't have a replacement so the only alternative is a partial refund which is within the soga

soga said:
If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

Rotty · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:38

JBuk said:
It may cost more than the value of the phone to have it repaired, they don't have a replacement so the only alternative is a partial refund which is within the soga

but they can supply a replacement , the above only applies when not physically possible iirc

JBuk · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:51

Rotty said:
but they can supply a replacement , the above only applies when not physically possible iirc

It's more to do with cost than availability
the shop doesn't have a replacement and it may cost too much to seek one ,repair also maybe too costly so a partial refund has been offered as they have had about 8 months of benefit

They don't have to accept the refund though and could seek damages in court but the Soga also has to be fair on retailers so a partial refund maybe the outcome of that anyways. Although the threat of legal action may force them to offer a full refund as it would cost them more to go to court.

Rotty · 2 Aug 2009 at 12:56

not as if there aren't other phones around at similar cost though, can't see them getting away with that one

JBuk · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:05

Rotty said:
not as if there aren't other phones around at similar cost though, can't see them getting away with that one

But they didn't buy one of those other models of phone

Think of it this way, if the phone was 4 years old would you expect a retailer to give a full refund if an exact replacement or repair wasn't possible?

The damages must be reasonable to both parties

like somebody said already it may be best seeing what the manufacturer says, they may be able to have it fixed/replaced under their warranty

brummie · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:22

JBuk said:
But they didn't buy one of those other models of phone

Think of it this way, if the phone was 4 years old would you expect a retailer to give a full refund if an exact replacement or repair wasn't possible?

The damages must be reasonable to both parties

like somebody said already it may be best seeing what the manufacturer says, they may be able to have it fixed/replaced under their warranty

What?? its not 4 years old. It has a 12month warranty, doesn't matter if the model is out dated. Not the consumers fault if they don't make that one any more. The onus on the seller and only the seller. They have to make it right whichever way they want where the consumer doesn't lose out.

JBuk · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:34

brummie said:
What?? its not 4 years old. It has a 12month warranty, doesn't matter if the model is out dated. Not the consumers fault if they don't make that one any more. The onus on the seller and only the seller. They have to make it right whichever way they want where the consumer doesn't lose out.

I suggest you re-read my post, I didn't say it was 4 years old.

The op hasn't stated that it has a 1 year warranty, you're right it is not the consumers fault if that model isn't available anymore.

The retailer has offered a partial refund (presumably because the other options are not within reasonbable cost) , the op has had 8 months of benefit from the phone so they are not losing out.

It's all there in the sales of goods act

Like I've said , if they the op doesn't agree with the offer they can always make a small claim against the retailer.

Efour · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:42

I always thought this was the kind of risk/deal you took when buying 2nd hand good from a shop like this ?

semi-pro waster · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:48

brummie said:
What?? its not 4 years old. It has a 12month warranty, doesn't matter if the model is out dated. Not the consumers fault if they don't make that one any more. The onus on the seller and only the seller. They have to make it right whichever way they want where the consumer doesn't lose out.

The phone has been purchased from a secondhand/exchange type place so while the SoGA still applies the manufacturers warranty of 12 months may already have been exhausted - the SoGA also stipulates that the product should be fit for purpose and for a reasonable period of time, it is open to interpretation how long that period is.

LOAM · 2 Aug 2009 at 13:49

you should count yourself lucky you got 8 months of use out of it and a relatively high partial refund, I returned a graphics card once after having it for a little over 4 weeks before it failed, It was returned and it took nearly 10 weeks for them to say it was faulty. I was then refunded 75% of its original value as had and I quote "had the benefit of nearly 4 months use out of it".

Bite their hand off.