How do I approach this...

Where did this notion that you are entitled to an immediate exchange of faulty goods come from. Consumer law states the retailer must take reasonable actions to solve the problem, IE send it to MS on your behalf.

There is so much rubbish spouted about this subject it is incredible.

As for the op why not go speak to the retailer before contacting trade ad standards and posting on a forum. I bet if you did that first your problem would be solved or on the way to be being solved
 
[TW]Fox;10545173 said:
Burnsy I'm not exactly sure what point you are arguing here. Nobody is saying he isn't entitled to have his console repaired by the retailer (or an agent acting on behalf of the retailer).
Click to expand...

Yeah I have digressed a bit, my original point was that its considered an inherant fault.

My arguement is mainly based around the fact that the huge amount of repairs MS has had to undertake releates to an obvious fault in the manufacturing/design process, otherwise you simply wouldn't have this amount of faliure.

Burnsy
 
[DW]Muffin;10545219 said:
You won't find inherent fault as that would equal mass recall, that hasn't happened.
Click to expand...

Why would it mean mass recall?

It's not a safety concern, but a reliability one.

Burnsy
 
Burnsy2023 said:
My arguement is mainly based around the fact that the huge amount of repairs MS has had to undertake releates to an obvious fault in the manufacturing/design process, otherwise you simply wouldn't have this amount of faliure.

Burnsy
Click to expand...

Whilst what you say is true I am not sure how it relates to the OP's question, hence the confusion :)
 
[TW]Fox;10545453 said:
Whilst what you say is true I am not sure how it relates to the OP's question, hence the confusion :)
Click to expand...

I've just re-read [DW]Muffin's post and realised that my arguement is a bit pointless.

Just because it's an inherent fault doesn't mean that your rights to a refund change. They can still offer a replacement or repair and it's up to the retailer to choose which.

Gah, I really can't work and browse the forums at the same time :o

Burnsy
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Their T&Cs have legal grounding though.



Edit that sweary MR!! :mad::mad:



Lesson 101 of how not to do it?

Burnsy
Click to expand...

Oh Christ a swear word and a competitor in one post. Sorry I didn't realise that one was a swear word and the other was a competitor.

I think the story about my brother and that retail shop is hilarious. Not the best way of dealing with it but he did get his money back (from another store)
 
[TW]Fox;10546143 said:
Retail law is not confusing, but the popular public opinion and misconception surrounding it can muddy the waters somewhat.
Click to expand...

Knowing when something becomes null and void and starts on something else with it all being a grey area, is confusing, for meere-mortals.
 
Deiwos said:
In purchasing the product from the company, you accept their T&Cs and so their T&Cs have legal standing, and they do not have to offer something that their T&Cs do not stipulate. Directgov even says on their website to watch out for T&Cs.

I'm in no way defending any company, as I fully agree that T&Cs can be rubbish but I'm highlighting the fact that you can't always just walk in and get a replacement.
Click to expand...

You need to edit what you have quoted because the LordSplodge has been a bad boy!

Also some companies try using T&C's to skirt their legal duties so you have to watch out what the rob dogging ******** do. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom