Monarch Mobility and mobility scooter - Rejecting an item

[Surfer01]

As I needed a mobility scooter

I did a check Online and contacted Monarch Mobility via their Online form.

A rep then contacted me and we arranged an appointment.

 

The rep arrived on time on 17th Novemeber 2016 and did a demonstration of the Smarti folding scooter and I had a ride on it.

 

As it seem okay, we discussed finance

however to get finance I had to buy a "package which consisted of an extra lithium battery and a charger.

Also if I took the package they could not do a trade in on my current scooter.

 

I then decided to pay on using my credit card as I could do the trade in and the price was lower so instead of nearly £2700 it was £2295 less the trade in total was £2045.

 

I was then given a document in which it states that I have 14 days to change my mind and return the scooter.

I thought that under Consumer Rights Act 2015 it was 30 days?

 

on the 17th they supplied me with a scooter and the rep had to put in 3 batteries before he found one that was charged.

The rep left and we plugged in the scooter for about 3 days

 

however on Sunday past I went to use the scooter and the battery had lost quite a bit of the charge which is unusual for a lithium battery.

 

On reading the instruction manual it states that the battery has to be charged at least once a week even if the scooter is not used.

Never had this issue with my previous scooter which also had a lithium battery.

In addition, the "ignition" is very loose and the seat a bit wobbly.

 

I emailed Monarch about this but they have not replied.

I looked up their Facebook page and the remarks from a few people were not very complimentary.

Trustpilot also has one or two bad reviews with one being about the battery.

 

Can I reject the scooter because it is not up to standard and if so do I have to pay postage to send it back to Halifax which is about £25?

Who pays the postage to have my original scooter sent back?

[BankFodder]

The 14 day return offer which they gave you is a sort of goodwill cooling off period which they were not required to do because the contract is an on premises contract.

 

The 30 days. Which you refer to is a period under the Consumer Rights Act which entitles you to insist on a refund or replacement if a defect develops within 30 days.

 

As you appear to have identified defect and it is within the 30 day period you can exercise that right. You exercise a right by letting them know – best to do it in writing – that because of a defect you are rejecting the item. Right and the letter straightaway. Send it guaranteed next day delivery – signed for. People documents.

 

Because there is a defect, you are either required to return the item at their cost or they are required to collect it. In view of what it is, I would say that they are required to collect it so you can put them on notice in the letter that you are expecting them to come and get it within, say, seven days.

[Surfer01]

Thanks

I was under the impression it fll under Distance Selling as the inquiry was initiated over the Internet.

 

I have already sent them an email regarding the battery and will give them until tomorrow as I have until Thursday to reject.

 

The Cancellation clause that rejection must be done in writing and electronic mail is acceptable.

 

I don't want to jump the gun at the moment if they are willing to help.

[BankFodder]

If you assert your right to reject, you're not bound. If you send them the rejection, it may concentrate their minds a little. I suggest you do it now.

[Guest]

ah the hypocrisy. using the eu implemented con rights act, that gives more rights to the consumer...

no offence surfer, but cldnt resist that one.

just report my post, and it will be deleted.

[dx100uk]

just remember

if they mess you around

simply do a section 75 on your credit card.

 

def do not pay for it to be shipped to them.

 

they quickly came out to fleece you by selling it!

 

they can just as easy collect the cart the same way!

[Surfer01]

An update.

They replaced the battery and all was well

 

however I only used the scooter twice since the new battery was installed.

The scooter was then left on charge.

It is supposed to have a Lithium IOn battery.

 

In late February it was loaded into the vehicle for me to use at the NEC show

however on arrival the new battery was flat despite it being on continuous charge since the battery was changed.

 

I assumed that perhaps I had not plugged in the lead correctly and I was at fault although I am sure that I checked the state of the battery prior to loading it into the vehicle and it was okay.

 

Fast forward to today.

The battery has been on charge for the past two weeks in an off board charger that I bought from Monarch for the sum of £80.

 

I plugged it into the scooter today and it showed that it was only half charged.

Obviously this is no good to me as either the off board charger does not work or the new battery has developed a fault. If I had not checked, we would have loaded the scooter into the vehicle only to find I could not use it at my destination.

 

I have lost all confidence in this scooter being a reliable means of transport for me and would prefer a refund and go elsewhere considering that I have only used the scooter twice and it has done less than 3 miles altogether.

 

My old "cheapie" scooter would remain charged up right through the winter and I am regretting trading it in.

 

I gave them the chance for a repair and that has failed again within 6 months.

The rep came to our home and the transaction was done at my home.

The off board charger was bought separately and just over 14 days ago

 

however I am not sure if it is faulty or not or whether it is the battery.

[dx100uk]

well as long as the off board charger is a lion charger cant see it being faulty.

unless by leaving it on charge for so long you've cooked the battery.

as it has no auto trickle charge change over

[Surfer01]

No mention was made that you cannot leave it on charge 24/7.

 

Looking at the charger all the work is done by the same lead that plugs directly into the scooter.

 

The charger seems to be just a "holder" for the battery with no internal electronic components.

 

The rep told us that we could leave the lead in 24/7 and no mention is made in the Owner's manual that this should not be done.

 

At this point I have verbally requested refund from Monarch and will give them a couple of days to respond and if no response,

I will submit a written request,

 

but I need advice how to word the letter and whether I should make mention of CRA or section 75.

[Surfer01]

Are these T & Cs valid. Cannot find the method to post a pdf version.

T & C Monarch.pdf

[dx100uk]

no looks like you are ok.

 

yor originally reported the fault within the required time to demand a refund

the same fault is still there then.

 

pers i'd be rejecting the thing under the CRA 30 days limit.

 

if they don't play ball

 

section 75 time

[Surfer01]

I am considering Section 75 however is there a time limit as it has been 122 days since I paid using the CC?

 

 

Any comment on their T&Cs in my previous post?

[dx100uk]

their T&C's are irrelevant as such they don't play any part

the time limit you mention is for visa chargeback not sec 75

[Surfer01]

Reading the T & Cs again I have noticed that there is no details on cancellation rights and because this is not supplied it gives me the right to cancel extended to up to a year. I also bought an off board charger from them about 17 days ago which was delivered 14 days ago.

[dx100uk]

Post 13

[Surfer01]

I phoned them last week and was told I would get a call back, but nothing.

Same yesterday.

 

 

I have written to them over the weekend and sent the letter tracked on Saturday.

I have also started a Section 75 claim for the full amount of £2295 through my Barclaycard.

 

The issue here is that we are away on holiday at the end of the month and I will probably have to buy another mobility scooter to get around otherwise it spoils the holiday for my wife as she does not want to go places without me.

 

 

The concern is I am dipping into our holiday money for the scooter which cost about £500 or a hiccup and no refund and I am left with two scooters and then have to use the small claims court to fight my battle.

[Surfer01]

Update.

 

 

I have done a section 75 and sent off all the relevant information.

 

 

This afternoon someone from Monarch phoned me and told me that they want to do a repair.

I informed them that they had already done a repair for the same fault which had re-occurred.

 

 

I informed them that I had lost all faith in the scooter and wanted a full refund.

I was told that they would not offer me a refund as the 14 days for cancellation had passed.

 

 

They were informed that under the CRA 2015 I was entitled to a refund as the scooter had developed the same faults again within 6 months.

They insisted on an inspection and I told them that they must collect the scooter from my residence.

 

At this point I think we may have crossed wires as they were insisting on an inspection and I was insisting that they collect it, however in hindsight maybe this was not the correct thing to do.

 

 

The concern here is that if they take it away and then state it has a different fault,

I am snookered however the loose ignition switch they cannot get around.

 

 

They did also offered to take it away and leave me with a loan unit for my holidays

so I am now very unsure what to do as being stuck without a scooter will be a hassle.

 

 

The other concern is the the decision by the CC and if it will be in my favour.

 

 

The scooter company said if I was successful with the section 75

they would recoup the money from me by other methods?

 

Very unsure at present how to move forward.

[dx100uk]

go read post 6 here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?473115-Currys-Faulty-goods-repair-already-failed-again-want-full-refund!!-**full-refund-given-by-headoffice**&p=5010087&highlight=curry#post5010087

[Surfer01]

go read post 6 here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?473115-Currys-Faulty-goods-repair-already-failed-again-want-full-refund!!-**full-refund-given-by-headoffice**&p=5010087&highlight=curry#post5010087

 

Thanks very helpful and I will stand my ground as nothing to lose.

 

 

However I am still unsure whether to go ahead and buy another Pride scooter which will cost between £400 and £500. At least I will know that it is reliable and the lithium battery will stay charged for over a month.

 

I have always been under the impression that Lithium batteries were better than Nicad or wet cell batteries and would retain the charge longer.

 

 

My hand drill which has lithium batteries stays charged right over the winter.

My previous scooter which had a lithium battery stayed charged over the winter period.

This scooter which has a lithium battery will not stay charged for a week.

 

I bought the off board charger so that I could leave the scooter in the vehicle and just remove the battery for charging however with arthritis in my hands, wrists and forearms, it is impossible for me to remove the battery and the scooter needs to be taken out of the vehicle anyway.

 

 

They are refunding the cost of the off board charge as that was returned within the 14 day period so no argument there.

 

Thanks for the moral support and advice.

[dx100uk]

see what bankfodder says but IMHO you are entitled to a full refund.

[Surfer01]

Unfortunately I was overseas for most of April

 

 

Barclaycard have written rejecting my claim at present and are requesting that the mobility scooter is examined by a third party.

The concern here is that may be a loop hole for the supplier to oppose the refund if a third party is involved.

 

Also under the CRA 2015 there is no obligation for a consumer to get a third party to appraise the goods before rejecting them.

 

 

BC also state that for a claim under section 75 to succeed breach of contract or misrepresentation needs to be proved.

 

 

I am sure that having the same faults come up again within 6 months from date of purchase is breach of contract.

 

In the meantime

the supplier collect the scooter and left an unsatisfactory loan scooter.

 

 

On 10th April I emailed asking for an update and when no reply I chased it up again a few days later.

 

 

Still no reply although I had confirmation that they had received the email.

Seems the supplier is not bothered with customers?

 

Seems Barclaycard are also playing hardball!

[dx100uk]

section 75 differs from CRA

 

 

I would answer that you are quite willing to get a third party to inspect the scooter

however

at present the supplier has it and are refusing to communicate back to me

and

that as long as the inspection fee is refunded should the section 75 be successful.

[Surfer01]

BC have contacted me again today and are stating that I need to prove breach of contract and telling me that the merchants T&Cs show that there has been no breach of contract and that the CRA does not apply to breach of contract?

 

 

They referred me to the Which website and stated that after 30 days I could not get a refund at all and that the merchant should be given 3 chances to repair before a refund is issued.

[dx100uk]

as far as i'm aware cra says 'repair replace or refund'

the singular..repair [once only]

 

 

and CRa does apply to contracts ...silly beggars..

[Surfer01]

Gobsmacked!

 

When I did not hear anything further from Barclaycard I phoned them yesterday to be told that as it had been escalated I would need to wait.

 

I advise them that as it had been 8 weeks since I had raised the initial dispute on 18th march 2017 ,

I was going to contact the Financial Ombudsman.

 

I was then told that as the complaint had only been raised on the 3rd May

I had to wait 8 weeks from that date before I could raise the complaint to the FOS.

 

I have always thought that a dispute and a complaint in this context were the same thing.

checked and it is the date I raised the dispute.

 

BC have been very obstructive regarding this section 75 claim despite all the evidence showing that the trader has breached the contract on more than one occasion and still has the scooter in their possession and has not collected their loan scooter despite a request to do so.