How does the 7 day return "rule" work?

The Halk · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:20

Delvis said:
I had a monitor that had a few stuck pixels, I sent it back under the distance selling act because it was faulty and 'not to my expectations' as well as not performing 'as it should'.

Got a full refund

Yeah, you can do this and completely ignore whatever standards about stuck pixels I guess.

Does that mean that I have to assume everybody else is doing it and that I'm almost certain to get one with broken pixels because people just send them back every time?

Ironically that makes a retailer who states that I have to pay costs to return the item more desirable, because then at least people have to pay to take another throw of the dice.

MumboJumbo · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:21

I do wonder just how many second hard parts are floating about really. I've heard a lot of stories before of people even being given stuff in a new box with an rma sticker on it.

The Halk · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:23

I know OcUK do have A grade and clearance stuff, and obviously some DSR stuff must go in there... But is there any reason to do that with, for example, memory? If it comes back under DSR, it's fine, and it's tested... is it second hand? I wouldn't say so.

Delvis · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:32

8igdave said:
Thanks for the info guys, I was unaware of this.

I should have done this then with my tiny eany weany bit of back light bleed on what is otherwise an outstanding monitor. Ah well, it's not really noticeable anyway.

Dont know if it would have counted, as it was backlight bleed...Mine was a red stuck pixel in the middle of the screen, and it was annoying

The Halk said:
Yeah, you can do this and completely ignore whatever standards about stuck pixels I guess.

Does that mean that I have to assume everybody else is doing it and that I'm almost certain to get one with broken pixels because people just send them back every time?

Ironically that makes a retailer who states that I have to pay costs to return the item more desirable, because then at least people have to pay to take another throw of the dice.

lol...they might be!!! It took a few weeks to do it, and I just had to quote the act on them several times...It was faulty in my eyes

C.R.A.Z.Y · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:43

Mirage said:
I've recently used DSR to return a wireless router to a competitor, simply because it didn't do what they (both the supplier and manufacturer) had claimed it would.

Then you should have returned it under the SOG act and demanded that they cough up the cost of returning it!! They are legally obligated to do this when they have incorrectly advertised/described a product.

People need to get more clued up on consumer rights, no wonder some of the shatty company's try their luck!

mattyfez · 13 Jan 2011 at 22:59

The Halk said:
Yeah, you can do this and completely ignore whatever standards about stuck pixels I guess.

Does that mean that I have to assume everybody else is doing it and that I'm almost certain to get one with broken pixels because people just send them back every time?

Ironically that makes a retailer who states that I have to pay costs to return the item more desirable, because then at least people have to pay to take another throw of the dice.

Generally speaking its irellevant, you don't buy something with a view to sending it right back, you don't really stand to gain anything.

The Halk · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:04

mattyfez said:
Generally speaking its irellevant, you don't buy something with a view to sending it right back, you don't really stand to gain anything.

Don't you? How do you know?

If there's 50% of monitors have no dead pixels and the other 50% have ISO standard dead pixels...

And 20% of people will DSR a monitor with dead pixels if they don't have to pay postage, but approx 0% will send back if they do have to pay postage...

Then that means you're far more likely to get one with dead pixels if you order from a retailer that charges to send it back.

Why did I have to explain that to you?

Dave M · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:13

mattyfez said:
Generally speaking its irellevant, you don't buy something with a view to sending it right back, you don't really stand to gain anything.

Never heard of buyers remorse?

HangTime · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:32

mattyfez said:
Generally speaking its irellevant, you don't buy something with a view to sending it right back, you don't really stand to gain anything.

You might do if you needed a short term loan of something, which can often be required for testing purposes.

E.g. suppose your PC won't boot up, and you are not sure whether it is the Mobo/CPU. You don't have spares to test with. Easiest thing is arguably to order compatible replacements and then use DSR.

The Halk · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:34

HangTime has a good point.

I know you're allowed to inspect, but are you allowed to use? If you use a CPU you stand a good chance of leaving a trace of thermal grease. If you use a motherboard you can leave evidence that RAM was inserted, cards were inserted etc.

SiriusB · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:39

I'd love to try that! Been more than one occasion where I have had no spares to test which component is dead on someone's PC.

HangTime · 13 Jan 2011 at 23:58

Worth mentioning that I'd expect the buyer not to return the components that fix the problem though, e.g. if it's a dead mobo then I would expect them to use the replacement mobo they ordered not just test with it and then return and buy something else.

The Halk · 14 Jan 2011 at 00:12

Yep, but if you order a replacement CPU and it turns out the CPU wasn't faulty (it's the easiest thing to swap) then can you return the CPU and have them say that there's little marks from where the socket retains the pins, or a little residue from grease?

Ev0 · 14 Jan 2011 at 11:50

The Halk said:
I know you're allowed to inspect, but are you allowed to use? If you use a CPU you stand a good chance of leaving a trace of thermal grease. If you use a motherboard you can leave evidence that RAM was inserted, cards were inserted etc.

In regards to the DSR, it doesn't matter. The DSR are not concerned with if an item has been used, or the ability to resell an item once returned.

I find this document handy to use as a reference, it's the guide to businesses on how to comply with the DSR.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

How can I resell the goods as new if they have been opened
and tested by the customer?

3.59 The DSRs do not provide any general exception to the right to cancel
on this point. Unless one of the specific exceptions referred to above
at paragraph 3.38 applies, consumers can exercise their right to
cancel a contract and return the goods to you. The DSRs do not link
cancellation rights with a supplier’s ability to resell items as new.

In there it says the above along with all the other info.

PhillyDee · 14 Jan 2011 at 11:54

As said, all that is required is "Reasonable Care". In every case the consumer must receive a refund within 30 days of requesting an RMA.

The Halk · 14 Jan 2011 at 11:55

Hmm. In that case I think the DSR is too lenient towards consumers to the point where, as Telescope said, they have to account for it in their pricing.

Delvis · 14 Jan 2011 at 11:57

Meh, it should depend on the company whether returns are free or not...

But returning something because its not to your satisfactory needs, i have no qualms with

The Halk · 14 Jan 2011 at 12:03

The problem though Delvis is that people get different consumer rights.

The uninformed innocent masses just take what retailers tell them as the truth. So they can't return goods, or pay restocking fees, or don't open them or think if they open them they can't return them. Etc.

The informed consumer with good morals uses the law correctly.

The informed selfish consumer rips the **** and everybody ends up paying more.

I'd like to see the DSR trimmed down to a sensible balance, but companies who state T&Cs or who get mystery shopped by trading standards and try to wriggle out should get massive fines.

PhillyDee · 14 Jan 2011 at 12:17

The Halk said:
Hmm. In that case I think the DSR is too lenient towards consumers to the point where, as Telescope said, they have to account for it in their pricing.

Way too lenient! It favours the buyer at the expense of the seller.

As said, large companies rely on the uninformed masses to recoup costs by charging restocking fees, or in the case of mine, charging the card refund fees! (2 phonecalls, a lot of attitude from their sales advisor and a reminder of my legal reights and court and it was sorted)

The largest companies do this because people do say "Well, they are a large company, they must be right"

Delvis · 14 Jan 2011 at 12:24

The Halk said:
The problem though Delvis is that people get different consumer rights.

The uninformed innocent masses just take what retailers tell them as the truth. So they can't return goods, or pay restocking fees, or don't open them or think if they open them they can't return them. Etc.

The informed consumer with good morals uses the law correctly.

The informed selfish consumer rips the **** and everybody ends up paying more.

I'd like to see the DSR trimmed down to a sensible balance, but companies who state T&Cs or who get mystery shopped by trading standards and try to wriggle out should get massive fines.

True...which is why it should be stated in T&C's somewhere...but then you cant exactly list every trading law on the T&C's can you?