just means its take from source rather than dd

Hi, dx yeah, they take it from his wage before it hits his bank. Just spoke to step son and he is looking for his contract now, apparently it was an electronic one so hopefully, he still has it available in his emails.

He is not sure who the contract is with, he reckoned it was with the employer, but we shall see, will let ye know when I find out.

regards

MrBrooks

no its all with Halfords [or whomever finance them usually in the small print at the end of the agreement.]

Just looking now, you may well be correct dx about it all being with Halfords, it is all confusing me a bit, so apologies if I sound a bit dumb!!!

The scheme is operated by his employer,

he was ok'd by them etc,

I have just seen is Letter Of Confirmation with his maximum amount he can spend etc and take to one of the approved shops to get his bike..

.What I am not sure about,

is who he is paying,

is he paying Halfords,

or is he paying his employer,

who then pay Halfords,

is he paying his employer who has already paid Halfords,

or who holds the contract and is legally responsible for the credit/hire purchase and who would want their money if he stopped paying etc

(not that he is going to just yet)...

I am still looking through the emails he sent me...

What I want to do,

is ask for a refund,

he has been paying £51 a month since Feb 2017,

and is on an 18 month contract,

but he does not want this bike anymore after all poor quality of product,

poor repairs and poor customer service

and is happy to simply hand the bike back

and ask for what he has paid in so far to be handed back to him if this is possible.

Thanks again dx and any other CAG members that may have anything to add then please feel free.

regards

MB

post 26

its simply an hp agreement with Halfords with payments being taken directly from his wages rather than a bank direct debit.

the problem here is the faults were first reported outside of 6mts?

Yes, unfortunately, they were reported just outside the first 6 months,

but the fact is that the bike has had little use,

it was reported in month 7,

the bike is 8-9 months old,

was not used for almost 3 months,

also we must not forget,

it has also not been used for almost 6 weeks now either,

due to it being damaged and then spending over 2 weeks in Halfords workshop,

I feel the 6 month thing is very very misleading in this particular case.

I do wonder however if they will try to pull the 'it's outside the 6 months',

I will happily pull the,

'I do not give a hoot, its age, in this case, is irrelevant to a large degree if not entirely, the bike does not show any signs of wear and tear, due to its lack of use'

to be honest with you,

I am also quite sure we could easily question its quality,

apparent lack of durability and in turn its fitness for purpose, in court, and would really have little chance of being proved wrong.

Someone experienced in building bikes can clearly see that this bike has had very little use,

the fact that it has failed after such little use, irrelevant of its age, indicates that the quality of the item is openly questionable,

the item lacks any of the expected durability of such an item,

and again,

especially has it has had so little use,

and if he had used it properly in that first six months,

I have absolutely no doubt this fault would have appeared much sooner.

They have made the repair,

and have damaged the bike in the process,

and have handed it back over with non-straight handlebars

and a front wheel that is now catching somewhere as you can hear it rubbing as it spins.

I am absolutely loathe to let this drop just because they think they can get away with it simply because it may be over the 6 months and will do my utmost to make sure they fix this,

if he is going to be forced somehow to be committed to this 18 month contract,

then he deserves a bike that reflects the amount of cash he is committed to paying for it

and he deserves some respect

and support from them instead of the deadbeat attitude they have displayed so far.

I am still unsure about who he is actually paying,

I cannot find it anywhere at this time of writing,

I have been on and off the website for his employers,

have had to do some other stuff too,

still have things to check,

I am thinking I will fire off another email to Halfords about the poor repairs and mention a replacement,

see how they take it, and in the meantime look for the proof of who the creditor actually is.

Thanks again for the all the input and please do keep throwing in the thoughts....

Best wishes

MB

stop waffling.

its Halfords told you that 3 times atleast now.

they've repaired the bike

but sadly made a few schoolboy errors whilst doing so.

the rubbing will no doubt be the brake pads as the handlebars are not true and one of the brake cables is being pulled for that brake - making the pads too close to the rim.

it a whole lot better if you stop using email or phone

snail mail only with free proof of posting.

don't think you've anywhere to go by lumping poor reassembly in with the initial problem and making that equal not fit for purpose now

the poor reassembly has nowt to do with the bike itself and its over fit for purpose from birth..its human error not another fault from birth with the bike

Hi dx, thanks for the help and reality shock.

I have no idea what you mean Halfords have told me 3 times, I have missed this.

The bike has discs but rubbing is rubbing, it is more than a schoolboy error, the frame shows signs of damage from the repair, gouge and scuffs, the bike unrideable, has been for some time, its main purpose is to be ridden but I obviously have a different view on this than yourself.

I was kind of thinking out lout, wont do it again and wont waffle anymore.

Thanks again.

MB

I think the over view here is simply down to Halfords not having the claimed expertise to even assenble the bike properly in the first place.

I seriously doubt its got anything at all to do with W+T simply the above.

that's seems to be supported by the fact that upon 'repair' they bodged other simply tasks any properly knowledgeable bike mechanic would have not made.

a stern letter to the CEO might be an idea with regard to the above.

what you need to remember is its their bike, they own it until the last 'agreement' payment is made.

you wouldn't hire a taxi and pay for it to take you from A to B if he only got half way and said 'sorry that's as far as I can go'

same scenario

dx

Hi dx, my thoughts are these.

The bike was badly assembled in the first place.

If my step son had not gone off sick,

I have no doubt this would have become apparent within the first 3-6 months.

Despite this issue not becoming apparent until month 7,

the bike has had such little use,

that there is no real way they can deny it is either poor workmanship or faulty parts.

I do not feel they have a solid leg to stand on,

from any angle,

as it is apparent that despite it being past 6 months,

the bike looks pretty much brand new,

the tyres even have their vent spews still on them so I agree 100% it has nothing to do with W&T.

My problem,

what do I say,

what do I ask for,

who do I approach?

I came here to throw a few thoughts into the air,

as it were,

see what other folks could throw at issue.

What I want is a bike that works,

a bike that has not been knocked about and damaged by them,

I want a bike the lad can rely on and not worry whether it is going to break and if it does that he is going to have trouble getting them to deal with it.

In respect of the above post and Halfords owning the bike,

I agree, wholeheartedly,

I am composing an email to the CEO and customer service reps,

what I am going to ask for is a replacement,

he keeps paying for the bike as per the agreement,

cos, after all, he needs a bike but maybe they should give him one that works properly,

if this is not forthcoming I will request they at least put right those issues they have created with the botched repairs and ask what they are going to do about the gouged frame.

I would ask for a refund and for them to end the contract as I feel they have let him down,

I am not sure how this would go down and how much effort and time would be involved to get to a resolution,

he needs to get back on the road and not having a bike is costing us all extra,

all the while he is still paying for this bike he has been unable to use for the last few weeks.

I even hoped Halfords would offer him some form of goodwill to say sorry for the inconvenience,

I have not heard a thing from them,

they have not even asked us how the repairs went and if we are happy, they have said nothing.

I will just write out the issues and problems as I see them,

ask for a replacement,

and let them respond as they see fit and deal with it from there.

Thanks again

MB

for whatever reason, you need to forget about how the issues became outside of the 6mts limit.

Everything points toward improper and poor assembly from day one by Halfords

this is further supported by additional issues being introduced upon return again down to poor reassembly by their staff.

I would suspect Halfords are hoping you'll go away

but it doesn't work like that...

he is paying them for a serviceable product, that product is financed under the consumer credit act.

Their [in] actions have caused the product to not meet what any reasonable person would consider as a usable item.

p'haps suggest to the CEO that you would be happy if the frame were to be replaced and the initial peddle crank issue be researched as to if some form of locking washer had been omitted from day one

resulting in the continued problems the led to its repeated return to their store and led to additional rubbing issues after such.

you ultimate weapon here is to tell them that unless these issues are resolved then payment will be refused and you'll gladly see them in court whereby a judge would preside over the whole debacle.

Their lack of any 'customer service' is giving you no faith in not considering the above action.

give him 14 days .

dx

Hi dx thanks for the great advice, I agree, I have already taken your hints about the 6 month thing, I undesrstand that this may be flogging a dead horse, and focused on the poor workmanship angle from day one which makes the bike barely useable and unsafe.

I have also mentioned that I am less that confident in the customer services too and rather dissapointed with the fact they have basically palmed it off onto the bike shed kiddies.

The issue/confusion I have with the CCA is how to apply it, and the issue with the payment is that it goes out before he gets paid into his bank, so I am not sure how to go about stopping this, I suppose we have to ask his employer? Do you have guidance on this one? I worry that if I 'threaten' to kill the cash, that we are able to actually do it.

Thanks again for your pointing fingers!

MB

grrr focus

ofcourse a payment from his employer will go out before the remainder of his wages gets paid to his banks account..

it paid at source....

he is quite legally entitled to tell his employer to stop the payments...

it HIS wages HE decides where they go...

stop introducing ifs and buts and maybe's...stick to the facts.

STOP WAFFLING!!!!

dx

Haha...

Dx. you have been very helpful as always.

I have no wish to upset you.

I will stop posting now and let you be.

MB

hey no need

knock up a letter and we'll adapt.

I don't operate like that

its only type on a screen.

focus..

dx

Hi dx, will try to get a letter/email drafted up today and also ask step son to look at the website for contact details regarding the scheme (his employer Mitchell and Butler) have their own website for the scheme, so he can then enquire about ceasing the payment if required.

Thanks again

MB

Seems that the basic premise for the Cycle To Work is the the company buy the bike from the vendor, then rent it to the employee, so the contract is between employee and employer not employee and bike vendor...not that this makes much difference to the issues, only to who you approach depending on what you wish to achieve. So it would be his employer we need to approach if we want to go down the road of ceasing the payments and asking for any refunds etc...

I have sent Halfords an email, to their senior management team, and have received a response today saying they are looking into the matter and will get back to me in the next couple of days.

regards

MB

Hi All, just wanted to throw in an update to this thread.

After sending out another email to the senior management/board indicating how unhappy we were, they prompted the store management team to get back in touch.

They have now fitted a brand new, upgraded (apparently) bottom bracket, fixed the front wheel/disc brake rubbing, straightened the handlebars back to centre, and threw in some new pedals for my stepson which they fitted, and have touched up the paint where it was scratched.

In the end, they did what they were supposed to do, albeit with a bit of encouragement required, but they got there in the end.

So my stepson has had the bike back since Tuesday and has been going to and from work on it all week, and it all seems nice and working well.

So thanks to everyone who chipped in with the comments and thoughts and a big thanks to DX100, as ever, for the continued support, and patience of a CAG Site Team member. ;-)

The issue, at least for now, and hopefully for good, is resolved.

Best wishes to everyone.

MB

thats good news. I too have had issues with Halfords on my wifes bike with issues. Wouldnt buy from them again.....

Hi troublemaker,

it was a bit of a standoff at one point,

but once I started to mention things like consumer rights act,

product quality and durability,

or lack thereof,

and made it clear that I was in no mood for any more messing about or book passing

and had no intention of letting them get away with quoting their TnCs at us,

nailed home with a solid promise of a claim at court if they failed again to address the issues and perform their legal obligations,

then, and only they, did they go, ooh, ok we will fix it and repair it etc...

To be fair,

the guy I dealt with in the last leg of the episode was actually a nice guy,

he was the assistant store manager

and was quite upset things had gone this distance

and no one had brought it up to the attention of the store manager and himself, which I find really weird,

he also says he has 're-trained' the bike section staff to be a bit more careful when deciding what should and should not be taken on warranty and if in doubt they need to refer to the management for guidance, wether or not this will make a difference, who knows.

I did say again,

that it was plain to see,

even to the untrained eye,

that this particular bike was barely used

and their refusal to take it on was simply unacceptable

and this is why I had to take to HQ and make mention of court action,

and he agreed with me,

it should never have been refused the work in the first instance.

all fixed now,

and my stepson has been using it for a couple of weeks,

trouble free and very happy.

Thanks all...