PC World Won't Repair/Refund After 28 Days

[Zamzara]

Absolutely ridiculous. A company is a single legal entity, and each branch is a part of that company, and the company as a whole is responsible for its goods and its transactions.

If the individual branch was not the legal owner of the goods, they wouldn't be allowed to sell them. Or are you saying head office has to authorize every sale individually as well?

[retailerspointofview]

Originally Posted by Zamzara

Absolutely ridiculous. A company is a single legal entity, and each branch is a part of that company, and the company as a whole is responsible for its goods and its transactions.

If the individual branch was not the legal owner of the goods, they wouldn't be allowed to sell them. Or are you saying head office has to authorize every sale individually as well?

you also have no clue of retail

ok think of ebay. you are the owner( the seller)..
you tell ebay you have 50 printers you want to sell at £50 each. ebay then sells them on your behalf and takes the money off the customers and passes it to you..

the contract is between the buyer and you not ebay

the head office give the store authority to sell their product with the only limits being the stock levels and the price not dropping below certain discount levels from the companies set prices. they do not have to authorise every single product just authorise them to sell everything at set prices.

[patdavies]

Originally Posted by retailerspointofview

the contract begins when a exchange of cash is made for the exchange of ownership.

Wrong. Simply, wrong

if you bought a computer from a friend who was visiting his son who lives down the road and your friend lives 50 miles away. your legal rights are with the friend not his son. you refusing to contact your friend and demanding only his son deals with it is not allowing the original owner/friend (seller) the oppertunity to remedy it. then telling the friends son he is breaking the law wont get you anywhere apart from a kick in the teech and told to leave his house never come back and call his dad with the issue.

you contract is with the previous owner of the product (the dad, the holder of the money) not the venue (the son/store).

Edited.

You RPOV, oh great guru who is all-knowing about retail and SoGA; who cannot differentiate between seller, purchaser and owner, are now saying with the above quote that SoGA applies to private sales.


Edited.

(although to be fair, for the first time ever, in your last post you do seem to have managed to realise that the past participle of "to bind" is "bound" and not "binded".)

[Darren]

Originally Posted by retailerspointofview

you also have no clue of retail

ok think of ebay. you are the owner( the seller)..
you tell ebay you have 50 printers you want to sell at £50 each. ebay then sells them on your behalf and takes the money off the customers and passes it to you...

Now you are being a complete %*&!%*%

Originally Posted by retailerspointofview

the contract is between the buyer and you not ebay

.

This is correct. Ebay is just a place to advertise.
I, like many others on hear have sold items on ebay and none of us would consider them our Head Office


Like I said before, you should return your business degree and get a refund under SOGA, because its obviously not fit for purpose

[retailerspointofview]

think outside the box. you obviously have zero percent knowledge of a retail environment so i am using people as a demonstration.

yes private sales are different but imagine that they are not actually private sells but just names to represend the company infrustructure in a way you can understand

here simple maths

you=seller / HQ / owner of product
ebay=store
paypal=salesperson instore

yes ebay is not the head office.. the buyer can use ebay (the store) to contact you (seller / HQ / owner) if you want but the buyer cannot DEMAND ebay (store) to repair it.
they can refer the buyer onto you (seller / HQ / owner).

also the venue where the money is paid into ebay/paypal (store/staff) is not bound by the contract.
you(seller / HQ / owner) are bound as you(seller / HQ / owner) have the money.

please tell me you are starting to understand

[spikeachu]

Why is this so difficult?

If a problem develops with a product you can return it to the store of purchase.

The store of purchase can ask you to contact whoever they want, but the consumer has the right to say no. If this scenario occurs, the store must arrange a remedy on the consumer's behalf. (assuming that fault/error/deficiency complies with terms of the act) How they do this is of no relevance to the consumer as long as it is achieved in a reasonable timescale and at no cost to the consumer.

It really is that simple. No amount of analogies is going to change this.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by spikeachu

Why is this so difficult?

If a problem develops with a product you can return it to the store of purchase.

.

Correct! - RPOV, PLEASE TAKE NOTE

I have said this before. I recently issued a court summons against a large retail chain and was advised by the staff at my local court to address it to my local store.

[Parva]

like i always said to ensure the quickest remedy if its over £100 and gone passed 28days then call the customer support line who has greater authority then store level. they can check if the stores are authorised to remedy the issue or if it has to be sent away for repair.

Didn't bother quoting the rest of your drivel. Again I ask, where do you get these imaginery figures? I have had repairs / replacements way beyond this value in-store over the years. I'm not just talking PCWorld here though I suspect that you have a particular knowledge there. Your suggestion that the customer will have to speak to Head Office in-store is just laughable.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by Parva

Your suggestion that the customer will have to speak to Head Office in-store is just laughable.

I totally agree, actually everything he says is laughable, especially the 'Business Degree'

[demon_x_slash]

No one is asking the staff instore to repair anything. It is the customer's legal right to have the staff instore arrange a repair or replacement for them. That is their right under SoGA. The store, as I have said before, is a tentacle of the company octopus - honestly, dear, you really are getting nowhere with this. I'd try for something a little lower level, re-cover the basics, as you obviously haven't grasped them; they're doing Business GCSEs now, and then I recommend taking the A Level course, too - y'know, just to make sure you comprehend everything you've been taught.

Please tell me you are starting to understand

[gyzmo]

I wouldn't bet on it....

[StormWarrior]

here simple maths It's nothing to do with maths ??

you=seller / HQ / owner of product
ebay=store NO! e-bay is a forum to advertise. Nothing more
paypal=salesperson instore NO! paypal is just a payment handler

[blazing-badger]

This thread seems to be going nowhere. RPOV doesn't seem to grasp that the store and the company are one and the same entity. I get the impression he's just trying to get a reaction from us and distract us from more important matters. Frankly I think that anyone who knows anything about SOGA is just laughing at him now.

I vote that we leave this thread now and leave RPOV in his little fantasy world - the one where PCWorld's policies are more important than the law.

BB

[retailerspointofview]

Originally Posted by StormWarrior

here simple maths It's nothing to do with maths ??

you=seller / HQ / owner of product
ebay=store NO! e-bay is a forum to advertise. Nothing more
paypal=salesperson instore NO! paypal is just a payment handler

fine you know what go tell consumers to buy something and find the least likiest method of getting it fixed and go to that place.. avoid the people that are accountable legally. avoid the fastest route. avoid anything thats seems like a solution and demand your rights!!!

wait a certain time and then write a letter telling them that you are taking the company to court.
give them 14 days from the time you write the letter and leave it on the printer for a day or two.
post it. avoid special delivery or recorded delivery.

then when it come to the court case claim you done everything to allow them to inspect the machine and you even contacted their repair lines.. demand a new product double the price and add in a couple hundred pounds for good measure.

ok now the problems.
1. by you not contacting the repairline you are not allowing them time to remedy the issue.
2. you are wasting many weeks and spending money out of your pocket which might get reimburst from a court case depending on how you word your defence. but you are still out of money for a few weeks.
3. your stress levels go through the roof not having a working product while you prefer taking the company to court then getting it fixed
4. sending letters, going to legal experts is a waste of your free time and costs more then a single phonecall, which would fix it
5. the original person who was untrained to fix the item carries on with their life. but you are now stressed, out of pocket, without a working product for many weeks and having to spend days off work to action the claim.

ok.

one simple phonecall to the trained engineers or manufacturers. easy, fast, whats the problem.

i have seen many of your replies actually state to not contact the helpline and only go to the store which is where your comments are limiting the buyers options.

if you had some life experience of retail you would understand more about the law in the real world when it comes to SOGA.

stores can deal with it as a customer service issue but they are not breaking the law by asking you to contact the department that you are legally bound to, or a department which the contract is with has given authority to.it is a simple good will gesture not law.
forgetting any company policies exist you will only be left with writing to the head office and getting them to either arrange an engineer or replacement or refund.

using farepacks for instance. it went bust. do you see the out of pocket customers sueing the sales guys.. no, they have now binding to it.

no where in SOGA does it say your rights are with the venue either.. so the front door step where the farepack's representatives sold you the voucher scheme does not matter either.

the building where the items where sold such as the store, the cafebar, or the address of the servers of ebay. your contract remains with the previous owner of the product and the holder of your cash.

your contract is with the registered address of the company.

the company can authories individuals, external parties, manufacturers etc but going to a party that is not authorised is not a good defence on your part.

again i state it simply the company HQ of pcworld give store staff authority within the first 28 days for any product. and after that only products under £100. if over £100 the authority is less fixed to ] get clarification as to who is authorised to repair the product best call 0870 242 0444.

in my store you contact me! not my delivery boy. ME!!

stop informing people on here that the contract is with the venue or the employee you handed other the money to

[Parva]

your contract is with the registered address of the company

Wrong, wrong, wrong yet again!

Please stop posting mis-information. Your contract is with the store and yes, it defaults to Head Office ultimately but in the case of PCWorld etc it's not an issue.

[Parva]

Furtheremore your post above is a moot point, return the item within the 12 month warranty! About time this thread was closed as you have had far too much airtime.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by blazing-badger

I vote that we leave this thread now and leave RPOV in his little fantasy world - the one where PCWorld's policies are more important than the law.

BB

Originally Posted by Parva

About time this thread was closed as you have had far too much airtime.