Returning a graphics card

[ubersonic]

Uber you won't find it as it don't exist.

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

People talk such ****.

Actually its in the document you linked (and the OFT's guidance on their website)

I think the main problem with all this is that the DSR regulations are so ridiculously unclear.

 

[Martini1991]

Actually its in the document you linked (and the OFT's guidance on their website)

I think the main problem with all this is that the DSR regulations are so ridiculously unclear.

What's unclear about that?

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

they do actually speak to the retailer first.

They MAY actually speak to the retailer. Certainly a few business I have worked for (I am in finance so I have been involved with bank transactions) the first we have known about a chargeback is the amount leaving the bank account. Typically a few days later we would get a more detailed letter from the bank.

 

[pete248]

Pete, you still haven't answered my repeated question and the advertisement in regards to the bus ring.
If it has specs of the V1 then you can RMA as not as described, which then entitles you to postage costs being picked up by them.

Sorry Martini, I must've missed that. That's the thing, the specs on the site did indicate it was a V2 (the bus width was the only realistic way of comparing them, clock/memory speed can vary even if the card is the same), which is why I never bothered with trying to RMA as the DSR is law, so I thought i'd have more success with that. Otherwise my argument would be "It was your fault for labeling the product wrong vs. You should've checked the memory bus as that would've told you it was different".

 

[ubersonic]

What's unclear about that?

The bit where it says:

if the consumer has done no more than examine the
goods as they would have in a shop and if that requires opening
the packaging and trying out the goods then they would not have
breached their duty to take reasonable care of the goods. In a shop,
books and sheet music are usually displayed unsealed and therefore
opening such seals does not invalidate the right to cancel.

When was the last time you saw graphics cards lying loose on the shelf and staff just letting people put them into computers to test them?

If it states that doing X doesn't breach the customers duty then by definition doing the opposite of X does. The OFT have agreed with this interpretation when emailed by businesses being harassed by customers trying to abuse the DSR (that one I mentioned earlier where the guy wanted to DSR a CPU after using it) on this and im fairly sure any sane judge would too, of course the issue with interpretation is its always down to the judge on the day which is most likely why places like PC World don't bother going to the expense of fighting DSR claims.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I can see why some retailers are annoyed with the legislation. However I cannot see how they can get out of it.

Its like the returned postage argument, its simple for them to get out of it, but they actually have to do something in order to do so.

I think plenty try it on.

OP one other thing it may be worth doing is trying Which and possibly Watchdog, plus money saving expert website.

 

[Martini1991]

The bit where it says:



When was the last time you saw graphics cards lying loose on the shelf and staff just letting people put them into computers to test them?

If it states that doing X doesn't breach the customers duty then by definition doing the opposite of X does. The OFT have agreed with this interpretation when emailed by businesses being harassed by customers trying to abuse the DSR (that one I mentioned earlier where the guy wanted to DSR a CPU after using it) on this and im fairly sure any sane judge would too, of course the issue with interpretation is its always down to the judge on the day which is most likely why places like PC World don't bother going to the expense of fighting DSR claims.

Except the sentence doesn't end where you've bolded and instead ends with

"and if that requires opening
the packaging and trying out the goods then they would not have
breached their duty to take reasonable care of the goods"

I've DSR'ed when I've been unhappy with an item/ordered the wrong item and it's gone fine.
Hell, people bought some Bulldozers, saw how utterly BS they were and DSR'ed that **** back.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

The bit where it says:



When was the last time you saw graphics cards lying loose on the shelf and staff just letting people put them into computers to test them?

If it states that doing X doesn't breach the customers duty then by definition doing the opposite of X does. The OFT have agreed with this interpretation when emailed by businesses being harassed by customers trying to abuse the DSR (that one I mentioned earlier where the guy wanted to DSR a CPU after using it) on this and im fairly sure any sane judge would too, of course the issue with interpretation is its always down to the judge on the day which is most likely why places like PC World don't bother going to the expense of fighting DSR claims.

Thats not in the actual act though its a more heavily worded part intending to clarify that simply trying to escape the act by saying people have opened or lost part of the packaging exempts them from the legislation

 

[Surveyor]

I think the main problem with all this is that the DSR regulations are so ridiculously unclear.

The Regulations seem quite clear.

Its from the OFT's guidance on the regulations, I don't know which specific section it references.

The only requirement in the legislation regarding the condition of the goods is that the consumer "takes reasonable care of them".

Restoration of goods by consumer after cancellation

17.—(1) This regulation applies where a contract is cancelled under regulation 10 after the consumer has acquired possession of any goods under the contract other than any goods mentioned in regulation 13(1)(b) to (e).

(2) The consumer shall be treated as having been under a duty throughout the period prior to cancellation—

(a) to retain possession of the goods, and
(b) to take reasonable care of them.​

(3) On cancellation, the consumer shall be under a duty to restore the goods to the supplier in accordance with this regulation, and in the meanwhile to retain possession of the goods and take reasonable care of them.

 

[ubersonic]

Except the sentence doesn't end where you've bolded and instead ends with

I included that, if you read it its saying "if its okay to do this then alls good" so if its not ok then all can't be good can it?

I've DSR'ed when I've been unhappy with an item/ordered the wrong item and it's gone fine.

Me too, ive DSR's monitors with dead pixels, but in a shop I (like any sane I.T enthusiast) would ask to see the monitor powered up before buying.

 

[pete248]

ubersonic, please refer back to this post about the guy in the bike shop: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=22182697&postcount=149

It specifically says the bike was "picked up" and "taken and ridden". And that the shop still had to take back the returned tricycle.

 

[Martini1991]

Me too, ive DSR's monitors with dead pixels, but in a shop I (like any sane I.T enthusiast) would ask to see the monitor powered up before buying.

How's that any different to seeing a GPU working?

And I wouldn't ask to see it power up, if it was broken I'd just take it back and get a refund, but that's more down to I'd find it an inconvenience to check in store, due to the staff and the tiny stores etc.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Even if you have damaged the goods they still have to DSR. They have to then go after you for damages, this whole thing really screws retailers and retailers try to be draconian but are against the legislation. I feel for retailers, eg I would suggest their only course of action is this, but they CANNOT refuse to refund under DSR.

"You may provide instructions to the customer about how to take care of the goods and packaging, however, any instructions cannot restrict a customer’s reasonable opportunity to inspect and assess the product. Customers have the right to cancel even if they fail to take reasonable care of the goods, however, you do have a right of action against customers for any breach of their statutory duty to take reasonable care."

Note this says assess not just inspect.
Then it says the have the right to cancel if they do not take reasonable care thats the only possible option complying with the legislation that I can see. I cannot see anything at all that allows them to reject a DSR.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

How's that any different to seeing a GPU working?

And I wouldn't ask to see it power up, if it was broken I'd just take it back and get a refund, but that's more down to I'd find it an inconvenience to check in store, due to the staff and the tiny stores etc.

Its no different. A GPU is no different to a PC monitor if its been unpacked and turned on both have exactly the same usage and you could not differentiate one to another in terms of the legislation.

 

[Swifty55]

Should have ordered from OcUK...

 

[Kenai]

The arguments about whether the DSR apply all stem from the fact the actual legislation and the guidance about what the legislation is intended to achieve say different things.

Sure - the DSR is intended to give consumers the opportunity to inspect an item as they would in a shop. This is the spirit behind it all and clearly putting it in your machine and trying it out goes beyond this.

However nowhere in the actual legislation does it mention that, as has been pointed out several times, the actual legislation which both parties must adhere to mentions only that 'reasonable care' must be taken. The fact their guidance extrapolates massively from this is neither here nor there I would think.

If he's not completely destroyed it and bent the heatsink, torn the box to shreds etc. then I think you'd find it hard to argue that he had not taken reasonable care of it.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Ive been looking around and I must say the implementation of the DSR across retailers is terrible. Looking at all the major retailers practically all of them quote stuff that is not allowed under the DSR

Mainly about packaging it must be said but even so its quite clear retailers are not following the strict rules.

 

[The Halk]

Ive been looking around and I must say the implementation of the DSR across retailers is terrible. Looking at all the major retailers practically all of them quote stuff that is not allowed under the DSR

Mainly about packaging it must be said but even so its quite clear retailers are not following the strict rules.

The big one nobody follows - and I'm sure OcUK won't do it either is that the refund is independent of the goods being returned.

I buy something. I say I want to return it. The retailer refunds me, while I've got 30 days to get it back to them.

I'd be stunned if OcUK processed a refund before they'd received and checked the item.

 

[Surveyor]

The big one nobody follows - and I'm sure OcUK won't do it either is that the refund is independent of the goods being returned.

I buy something. I say I want to return it. The retailer refunds me, while I've got 30 days to get it back to them.

I'd be stunned if OcUK processed a refund before they'd received and checked the item.

The retailer also has 30 days to issue a refund so I doubt they'd be in a rush to do it before the goods are sent back.

 

[The Halk]

The retailer also has 30 days to issue a refund so I doubt they'd be in a rush to do it before the goods are sent back.

I'd not follow it either. You'd be crazy to follow it.