Jump to content

kp278

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

About kp278

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ok, so Link will keep recording a fresh default each month until the original default date has hit six years?
  2. Ah I may not have been clear .She still owes money on the Tomlin and this is paid off monthly, and a default is recorded each month along with the reduced balance. Should a default be recorded each month even though the Tomlin is being paid off?
  3. Hi My friend has a Tomlin order that she has been paying off. There's still a while to go on it, but we noticed Link are still recording a default each month. Do we just have to suck this up for a couple of years, or are Link being naughty? Thanks, Kristian
  4. I think they were educated sufficiently on the 120 day rule, but the sticking point in the end was how it could be proven my daughter didn't damage the ruck sack herself. I got a reference number from them in case I can take it further.
  5. On the phone to Lloyds now, they are saying because it wasn't faulty when I received it they cant open a case. They've cottoned onto the 'wear & tear' aspect of it. I'm trying to push the "failed within six months the retailer has to prove it wasn't faulty" and "it wasn't visibly faulty, but it failed prematurely so it must have been faulty" angle
  6. can i put anything in the LBA about seeking any costs at this stage, for the amount of effort in trying to resolve?
  7. if this is too long, basically i sent it in, they checked it over, they agreed with the store again, they sent it back, now i'm onto letter before action - as you suspected would happen ok so i got hold of someone in customer services who asked for the bag to be sent in. their response is, predictably: I would like to confirm that I have now inspected your backpack and it is our belief that the issue is due to natural wear and tear and not an inherent manufacturing fault. I will today return your backpack to you at our cost. Please accept my sincere apologies for any disappointment caused. to which i replied: For a bag to suffer from natural wear and tear to the point of ripping in multiple places after only four months of use would surely suggest it was not of satisfactory quality nor fit for it's intended purpose?!?! The Consumer Rights Act states: (3)The quality of goods includes their state and condition; and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods— (a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied; (b)appearance and finish; (c)freedom from minor defects; (d)safety; (e)durability. I would suggest the bag has been used in line with part 3a but that it has failed under part 3e and arguably part 3c. Please reconsider your position on this. I would much prefer to avoid drawing this issue out any longer and do not relish the pursuit for costs should we be unable to reach an agreement without further action. fast forward three days later i received the bag back and no reply.
  8. Latest response from customer services, maybe I'm not speaking to the right people: The store have advised you of why this is, the fault is due to wear and tear of the item and is not a manufacturing fault. The item has been used by you for over 5 months and therefore the item was not sold to you faulty and after inspection, is confirmed to not be of manufacturing fault.
  9. I sent a basic, to-the-point reply: As I said in my previous email the onus is on the retailer to prove the item was not faulty at the time of purchase, not for the consumer to prove the item was faulty. You can find this information from the citizens advice bureau or trading standards. You will need to prove that the fault was caused by my daughter. Please advise how you intend to demonstrate this.
  10. they responded, not quite sure what that first line means, but think they misunderstood what i was saying. anyway here it is: This would determine a manufacturing fault if the item was sold to you as faulty, the item does not have a manufacturing fault. You are welcome to obtain an independent inspection if you wish, however, we will not be over riding the stores decision and agree with their findings.
  11. thinking maybe something straightforward back to customer service: I am not happy with the response. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, goods should be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. My rights have been breached because the item you sold me is faulty. I would like a refund. As you may be aware, the onus is on the seller to prove the item was not faulty at the time of purchase. Please can you advise how you intend to demonstrate this. I look forward to hearing from you by....
×
×
  • Create New...