If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
Dr Teeth wrote:
snip What point are you trying to make? Without the name of the company this is merely a work of fiction. -- Paul-B |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
I am not going to name the company involved in this story unless they
refuse my refund. I have already purchased a suitable domain for the whole story...see later. This company behaved in an illegal and unsatisfactory way IMHO. I bought a wireless router that would drop the PPP connection and not automatically reconnect. My two other routers and my (new) current one behave perfectly. I completed a returns form three days after receiving the new router and they replied, "On this item we need confirmation from the manufacturer that the product is faulty. This should not be a complex process. Please call the manufacturers technical support on xxxx xxxx. They should be able to provide a returns number that we require. In all cases please take the name of the person you speak to and update us on the conversation". I advised them that I was rejecting the goods as faulty, and under the law I do not have to prove the router faulty, they do. I also pointed out that it would be irrelevant if it passed their tests as working. The router was not sold with any conditions of use and it was reasonable for it to work as all my other kit does, connected to *my* phone line. It was pointed out that the only way that they could prove the router faulty would be to stay at my gaff for a few days...the cost of which would be more than the router's worth. Further refusal to budge. I the purchased a suitable domain 'do-not-shop-at-company's name.co.uk' and put up a holding page. I them wrote to the (?) major shareholder and company secretary at home. It is this bit that has **always** worked for me, making the company in question realise that I am VERY serious. Later on the day that the letter would have been received, I got a call at work from somebody who said that they had approved the return as it would not be worth their while fighting me. I mentioned that I was used to dealing with retailers who accept returns on the purchaser's word - which is most of them in my experience. The aforementioned chap told me that he would have to test the router before issuing a refund. I managed to get it out of him that it would be highly unlikely they would refuse a refund if the router worked, only if it were damaged in transit. TBH, I would not be surprised if they did declare it damaged to try to avoid giving the refund. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
"Paul-B" wrote in message ... Dr Teeth wrote: snip What point are you trying to make? Without the name of the company this is merely a work of fiction. -- Paul-B Ignore him Paul Dr Teeth is a pretty wellknown (on this group anyway) prick who any company would be well advised to refuse to deal with... Always in the face of a battle - Always aloof and prone to legalese jargon - Always no real clue - Always abusive to anyone who dares disagree with *his* viewpoint - Always right - Always moaning about every firm - Always ends up in a self-serving discourse with TX2 - Never satisfied - Self-professed consumers' champion - Defender of the Faith - All round chump - Clearly the unluckiest person on the planet (given all the problems he has with every item he ever orders) - ****s companies about to save 37p on a £900 laptop he found 'cheaper elsewhere and now wants to cancel the original order' - etc etc et-****ing-cetera Feel free to add your own... g. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
I was just thinking how wonderful life was, when "Paul-B"
opened his gob and said: What point are you trying to make? Duh! Without the name of the company this is merely a work of fiction. Only in what is laughingly called your mind. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
"Dr Teeth" wrote in message ... I am not going to name the company involved in this story unless they refuse my refund. I have already purchased a suitable domain for the whole story...see later. This company behaved in an illegal and unsatisfactory way IMHO. I bought a wireless router that would drop the PPP connection and not automatically reconnect. My two other routers and my (new) current one behave perfectly. I completed a returns form three days after receiving the new router and they replied, "On this item we need confirmation from the manufacturer that the product is faulty. This should not be a complex process. Please call the manufacturers technical support on xxxx xxxx. They should be able to provide a returns number that we require. In all cases please take the name of the person you speak to and update us on the conversation". I advised them that I was rejecting the goods as faulty, and under the law I do not have to prove the router faulty, they do. I also pointed out that it would be irrelevant if it passed their tests as working. The router was not sold with any conditions of use and it was reasonable for it to work as all my other kit does, connected to *my* phone line. It was pointed out that the only way that they could prove the router faulty would be to stay at my gaff for a few days...the cost of which would be more than the router's worth. Further refusal to budge. I the purchased a suitable domain 'do-not-shop-at-company's name.co.uk' and put up a holding page. I them wrote to the (?) major shareholder and company secretary at home. It is this bit that has **always** worked for me, making the company in question realise that I am VERY serious. Later on the day that the letter would have been received, I got a call at work from somebody who said that they had approved the return as it would not be worth their while fighting me. I mentioned that I was used to dealing with retailers who accept returns on the purchaser's word - which is most of them in my experience. The aforementioned chap told me that he would have to test the router before issuing a refund. I managed to get it out of him that it would be highly unlikely they would refuse a refund if the router worked, only if it were damaged in transit. TBH, I would not be surprised if they did declare it damaged to try to avoid giving the refund. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. Hi, Interesting they talk about "not worth their fighting"... what / who / when / where? I thought this was a customer - why would anyone be trying to fight them...? I think it is agreeably pretty sick that clearly explained meanings of the various pertinent bits of legislation are frequently, almost routinely, attempted to be evaded: - sales of goods act - unfair terms in consumer contracts - distance selling regulations etc. etc. Operatives flapping about "warranties" whilst failing to understand that consumer rights cannot be undermined or overridden, and that warranties are in addition to statutory rights - just as an example. The DTI clearly state that under distance selling rights the consumer has a reasonable right to inspect and evaluate goods before deciding whether they wish to refuse them, etc. , etc. . Oh well - lol Best wishes, News Reader |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
News Reader wrote:
"Dr Teeth" wrote in message ... I am not going to name the company involved in this story unless they refuse my refund. I have already purchased a suitable domain for the whole story...see later. This company behaved in an illegal and unsatisfactory way IMHO. I bought a wireless router that would drop the PPP connection and not automatically reconnect. My two other routers and my (new) current one behave perfectly. I completed a returns form three days after receiving the new router and they replied, "On this item we need confirmation from the manufacturer that the product is faulty. This should not be a complex process. Please call the manufacturers technical support on xxxx xxxx. They should be able to provide a returns number that we require. In all cases please take the name of the person you speak to and update us on the conversation". I advised them that I was rejecting the goods as faulty, and under the law I do not have to prove the router faulty, they do. I also pointed out that it would be irrelevant if it passed their tests as working. The router was not sold with any conditions of use and it was reasonable for it to work as all my other kit does, connected to *my* phone line. It was pointed out that the only way that they could prove the router faulty would be to stay at my gaff for a few days...the cost of which would be more than the router's worth. Further refusal to budge. I the purchased a suitable domain 'do-not-shop-at-company's name.co.uk' and put up a holding page. I them wrote to the (?) major shareholder and company secretary at home. It is this bit that has **always** worked for me, making the company in question realise that I am VERY serious. Later on the day that the letter would have been received, I got a call at work from somebody who said that they had approved the return as it would not be worth their while fighting me. I mentioned that I was used to dealing with retailers who accept returns on the purchaser's word - which is most of them in my experience. The aforementioned chap told me that he would have to test the router before issuing a refund. I managed to get it out of him that it would be highly unlikely they would refuse a refund if the router worked, only if it were damaged in transit. TBH, I would not be surprised if they did declare it damaged to try to avoid giving the refund. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. Hi, Interesting they talk about "not worth their fighting"... what / who / when / where? I thought this was a customer - why would anyone be trying to fight them...? I think it is agreeably pretty sick that clearly explained meanings of the various pertinent bits of legislation are frequently, almost routinely, attempted to be evaded: - sales of goods act - unfair terms in consumer contracts - distance selling regulations etc. etc. Operatives flapping about "warranties" whilst failing to understand that consumer rights cannot be undermined or overridden, and that warranties are in addition to statutory rights - just as an example. The DTI clearly state that under distance selling rights the consumer has a reasonable right to inspect and evaluate goods before deciding whether they wish to refuse them, etc. , etc. . Would you be happy to receive something "new" that had been opened and used by someone else? -- James |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
I was just thinking how wonderful life was, when "News Reader"
opened his gob and said: The DTI clearly state that under distance selling rights the consumer has a reasonable right to inspect and evaluate goods before deciding whether they wish to refuse them, etc. , etc. . That generally does not mean taking the product out of the packaging and using it. The DSR is meant to confer the same opportunities that one would have in a shop. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
Dr Teeth wrote: I am not going to name the company involved in this story unless they refuse my refund. I have already purchased a suitable domain for the whole story...see later. This company behaved in an illegal and unsatisfactory way IMHO. I bought a wireless router that would drop the PPP connection and not automatically reconnect. My two other routers and my (new) current one behave perfectly. I completed a returns form three days after receiving the new router and they replied, "On this item we need confirmation from the manufacturer that the product is faulty. This should not be a complex process. Please call the manufacturers technical support on xxxx xxxx. They should be able to provide a returns number that we require. In all cases please take the name of the person you speak to and update us on the conversation". Seems fair enough. As vendor told you: "This should not be a complex process". Why start by mistrusting the vendor before you know? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
Dr Teeth wrote: I was just thinking how wonderful life was, when johannes opened his gob and said: Seems fair enough. As vendor told you: "This should not be a complex process". Why start by mistrusting the vendor before you know? I am within my rights to reject a product as faulty. A vendor does NOT have to get a returns number from a manufacturer as this vendor says. I start mistrusting people when they start lying. What matters is to fix your problem with the router. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
This is how to do it
I was just thinking how wonderful life was, when johannes
opened his gob and said: Seems fair enough. As vendor told you: "This should not be a complex process". Why start by mistrusting the vendor before you know? I am within my rights to reject a product as faulty. A vendor does NOT have to get a returns number from a manufacturer as this vendor says. I start mistrusting people when they start lying. -- Cheers, Guy ** Stress - the condition brought about by having to ** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights ** out of someone who richly deserves it. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|