Pixmania - delivery costs of faulty item

jel

Hi,

I purchased a projector from pixmania and it developed a fault in the first two weeks. I sent it back expecting them to replace it due to the fact I only had it for two weeks, however they decided to fix it.

The delivery charge to send it back to them was 108 euro, and they are refusing to refund the cost as they say if it developed the fault after the first 72 hours they will not cover it.

Does anyone know if this is legal?

Thanks.

Big Wave

You shouldn't have paid the delivery charge - insist they pick it up - too late now.

jel

Big Wave wrote: »

You shouldn't have paid the delivery charge - insist they pick it up - too late now.

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/conditions.html#cgv_10

"The manufacturer’s guarantee for a period defined by the product purchased and the brand. Shipping fees of the products are the customer’s responsibility.
However, if the product does not conform to the product description, shipping fees will be reimbursed to the customer. "

jor el

I was under the impression that Pixmania should cover the returns cost, but you could contact the European Consumer Center to see what they say.

Komplett: Aaron

FYI, as this is cropping up a bit, shipper is obliged to cover the cost under warranty/for faults etc (not so much for cooling off.) How and ever, you should clear it with the retailer - for example, they may wish to pick it up (and avail of a better rate for the shipping that they, as a bulk shipper, would get.) The rule of thumb is, you're entitled to have the shipping paid under a lot of circumstances, but check it with the retailer first. In fairness to Pix on this one, if I got a bill for 108EUR I'd pause for reflection

jel

Komplett_AMK wrote: »

FYI, as this is cropping up a bit, shipper is obliged to cover the cost under warranty/for faults etc (not so much for cooling off.) How and ever, you should clear it with the retailer - for example, they may wish to pick it up (and avail of a better rate for the shipping that they, as a bulk shipper, would get.) The rule of thumb is, you're entitled to have the shipping paid under a lot of circumstances, but check it with the retailer first. In fairness to Pix on this one, if I got a bill for 108EUR I'd pause for reflection

Their Ts&Cs state "The manufacturer’s guarantee for a period defined by the product purchased and the brand. Shipping fees of the products are the customer’s responsibility.
However, if the product does not conform to the product description, shipping fees will be reimbursed to the customer. " .

Yep 108 euros is quite expensive, but i'm a dumb consumer, they should be making it clear what the procedure is. I went according to their Ts&Cs, yet they refuse to acknowledge them in my opinion. Nowhere on their terms do they mention 72 hours.

Komplett: Aaron

jel wrote: »

Their Ts&Cs state "The manufacturer’s guarantee for a period defined by the product purchased and the brand. Shipping fees of the products are the customer’s responsibility.
However, if the product does not conform to the product description, shipping fees will be reimbursed to the customer. " .

Yep 108 euros is quite expensive, but i'm a dumb consumer, they should be making it clear what the procedure is. I went according to their Ts&Cs, yet they refuse to acknowledge them in my opinion. Nowhere on their terms do they mention 72 hours.

Moving away from the shipping to the 72 hours (a seperate issue, really); it's true that some manufacturers have a DOA ("Dead on Arrival", though it covers faults developed in the first X period) period, not all do and not all have the same amount. That being said, if it's developed a fault within warranty I'd say (without knowing all the facts about the case) that you are entitled to a repair and, if that fails, a replacement/refund. Not that I'm a major fan of pixmania ( ), the fact is that they're bound in what they can offer in this case as defined by the manufacturer's warranty conditions - if the DOA period is 72 hours and they issue you a replacement at 73 hours, any retailer would be out of pocket for both the original and replacement/refund. Now they're entitled to give it a repair job, and if that fails you're entitled to further recource (replacement/refund.)

TheDriver

for some reason it doesn't surprise me as pixmania has gotten bad press about this issue a lot on these forums

jel

Komplett_AMK wrote: »

Moving away from the shipping to the 72 hours (a seperate issue, really); it's true that some manufacturers have a DOA ("Dead on Arrival", though it covers faults developed in the first X period) period, not all do and not all have the same amount. That being said, if it's developed a fault within warranty I'd say (without knowing all the facts about the case) that you are entitled to a repair and, if that fails, a replacement/refund. Not that I'm a major fan of pixmania ( ), the fact is that they're bound in what they can offer in this case as defined by the manufacturer's warranty conditions - if the DOA period is 72 hours and they issue you a replacement at 73 hours, any retailer would be out of pocket for both the original and replacement/refund. Now they're entitled to give it a repair job, and if that fails you're entitled to further recource (replacement/refund.)

If you bought an item in a physical shop in Ireland, and it malfunctioned within the first two weeks, what would you expect the supplier to do?

I would expect and the consumer law would expect they would give you either a replacement or a refund.

What does consumer law say about this?

jel

TheDriver wrote: »

for some reason it doesn't surprise me as pixmania has gotten bad press about this issue a lot on these forums

In summary, they are a pack of shams, and in the current climate for retailers to provide unsatisfactory customer service is idiotic.

I would love for a more obvious way rather than this forum to make people aware of these issues.

Komplett: Aaron

jel wrote: »

If you bought an item in a physical shop in Ireland, and it malfunctioned within the first two weeks, what would you expect the supplier to do?

I would expect and the consumer law would expect they would give you either a replacement or a refund.

What does consumer law say about this?

The law says that you are, either online or in a shop, entitled to bring it back, but the seller is also entitled to offer you a repair before a refund or replacement (where it can be repaired, naturally); but the repair should be permanent. See http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Hot_Topics/Guides-to-Consumer-Law/Shopping/faults.html

MOH

jel wrote: »

If you bought an item in a physical shop in Ireland, and it malfunctioned within the first two weeks, what would you expect the supplier to do?

I would expect and the consumer law would expect they would give you either a replacement or a refund.

What does consumer law say about this?

From your OP, are they refusing to replace the product or to refund the postage?

jel

MOH wrote: »

From your OP, are they refusing to replace the product or to refund the postage?

They sent the item to the manufacturer to fix, so an instant replacement was never offered.

I got over that, but expected them to foot the cost of the shipping, and they are refusing to do that.

Komplett: Aaron

jel wrote: »

They sent the item to the manufacturer to fix, so an instant replacement was never offered.

I got over that, but expected them to foot the cost of the shipping, and they are refusing to do that.

Again, I'm not a fan of Pix, and am trying to remain impartial here... But you really should clear the delivery cost with them before sending it back. Otherwise customers could return items under platinum 400EUR same-day European delivery and a lot of retailers would go out of business fairly quickly... In your case, they may have a special rate with a courior that'd be far cheaper than what you got as a regular consumer, for example. The only type of shipping receipt that gets rubber stamped really (as far as Komplett is concerned) is the AnPost parcels... That being said, if I were you I'd push and push and push. Just that I can see where they're coming from as well.

Kencollins

I must say this company is a total disaster. I will never buy from them, currys, or dixons again. They are all owned by the same company. The european consumer law is VERY clear about postage issues on return of faulty items.

I had exactly the same problem with them...blah blah blah, refusing to pay ect. Then I found this in the european consumer charter:

In the case of a lack of conformity, the consumer shall be
entitled to have the goods brought into conformity free of
charge by repair or replacement, in accordance with paragraph
3, or to have an appropriate reduction made in the price or the
contract rescinded with regard to those goods, in accordance
with paragraphs 5 and 6.
3. In the first place, the consumer may require the seller to
repair the goods or he may require the seller to replace them,
in either case free of charge, unless this is impossible or disproportionate.
A remedy shall be deemed to be disproportionate if it imposes
costs on the seller which, in comparison with the alternative
remedy, are unreasonable, taking into account:
— the value the goods would have if there were no lack of
conformity,
— the significance of the lack of conformity, and
— whether the alternative remedy could be completed without
significant inconvenience to the consumer.
Any repair or replacement shall be completed within a reasonable
time and without any significant inconvenience to the
consumer, taking account of the nature of the goods and the
purpose for which the consumer required the goods.
4. The terms ‘free of charge’ in paragraphs 2 and 3 refer to
the necessary costs incurred to bring the goods into
conformity, particularly the cost of postage, labour and materials.

I brought this to the attention to the nice people at pixmania, and they decided they would send me a refund for the postage they illegally charged from me.

Again, I would never be tempted to by from them again, their low prices are obviously possible due to a complete lack of customer care and conformity to the law.

Ken.

eman66

In the case of a lack of conformity, the consumer shall be
entitled to have the goods brought into conformity free of
charge by repair or replacement, in accordance with paragraph
3, or to have an appropriate reduction made in the price or the
contract rescinded with regard to those goods, in accordance
with paragraphs 5 and 6.
3. In the first place, the consumer may require the seller to
repair the goods or he may require the seller to replace them,
in either case free of charge, unless this is impossible or disproportionate.
A remedy shall be deemed to be disproportionate if it imposes
costs on the seller which, in comparison with the alternative
remedy, are unreasonable, taking into account:
— the value the goods would have if there were no lack of
conformity,
— the significance of the lack of conformity, and
— whether the alternative remedy could be completed without
significant inconvenience to the consumer.
Any repair or replacement shall be completed within a reasonable
time and without any significant inconvenience to the
consumer, taking account of the nature of the goods and the
purpose for which the consumer required the goods.
4. The terms ‘free of charge’ in paragraphs 2 and 3 refer to
the necessary costs incurred to bring the goods into
conformity, particularly the cost of postage, labour and materials.

I brought this to the attention to the nice people at pixmania, and they decided they would send me a refund for the postage they illegally charged from me.

Again, I would never be tempted to by from them again, their low prices are obviously possible due to a complete lack of customer care and conformity to the law.

Is the above statement the law, or something less? Are all EU retailers bound by this?

mel123

so if you bought off Komplett, what rights do you have, will they collect faulty goods from you within the warranty period??