Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • PAPLOC = Pre Action Protocol Letter Of Claim. Heres a handy guide to sme of the acronyms you'll see on the forum... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/147286-posting-in-this-forum-and-a-z-of-motoring-terms/#comment-4399743  
    • Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout   Thames Water is lobbying for higher bills and lower fines to avoid bailout, report claims – business live | Business | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Britain’s largest water company is trying to avoid a potential multibillion-pound taxpayer bailout   despite giving out large dividends to shareholders and large bonuses to senior management UK water company dividends jump to £1.4bn despite criticism over sewage outflows WWW.FT.COM Payments include internal transfers between complex web of holding companies   In charts: how privatisation drained Thames Water’s coffers | Utilities | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Decades of underinvestment and bumper dividends have left the firm debt-laden and under investigation   ‘The whole thing stinks’: water firms to pay £15bn to shareholders as customers foot sewage bill | Water bills | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM With cost of cleanup to be passed on to bill payers, analysis shows they will also pay £624 more by 2030 to fund investor payouts    
    • Are you still claiming Tax Credits / Universal Credit? They will likely take a small monthly amount off , if you are
    • So much for protecting our borders - Guv all just dog whistles   Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration to have budget slashed - Neal The Office for the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration will have its budget cut by five per cent year on year, David Neal has revealed, Holly Bancroft reports. Mr Neal is giving evidence to the Home Affairs Committee in a one-off session on immigration after being sacked by James Cleverly. The home secretary said Mr Neal had “breached the terms of appointment and lost the confidence of the home secretary” after Mr Neal warned of “dangerous” failings by border force that he claimed were allowing “high-risk” aircraft to land in Britain without security checks. The Home Office had “categorically rejected” the claims, saying that Mr Neal “has chosen to put misleading data into the public domain”. You can read more here: Home Office sacks immigration chief after criticism of border security
    • "In an explosive revelation, Mr Staunton also alleged that the current Post Office CEO threatened to resign over a HR investigation into his own conduct. Mr Staunton said Post Office chief executive Nick Read had fallen out with the HR director “and she produced a document that was 80 pages in length” and there was just one paragraph in there about his own conduct and use of “politically incorrect comments”. Mr Staunton said Mr Read was “really quite upset” and threatened to resign a number of times. But just an hour before Mr Staunton’s testimony, Mr Read had denied - under oath - that he had ever having tried to resign."   I’m victim of smear campaign says sacked Post Office chair as he accuses CEO of lying WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Henry Staunton, sacked by business secretary Kemi Badenoch, gives evidence to Commons committee     see also from the post above "Carl Creswell, an official from the Department for Business and Trade said Tidswell had told Ben Tidswell that some board members might resign if Henry Staunton were not sacked)" Tidswell says he was right (See 11.14am.)"   So baden-ouch seems to be at the very least twisting the truth - no surprise there    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

What are my rights? Defective front door replaced with defective front door under warranty.. TWICE!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 112 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello all, I'm looking for advice. 

A well known Windows and Doors company in Scotland originally fitted a new front door and door frame in 2019 with a 10year guarantee. In 2021 it was noticed that the door had warped and wouldn't close properly. It was replaced under warranty. However issues arose again in April 2023 when the door wouldn't open. upon inspection the mechanism was replaced and the door identified to have warped, so again was replaced under warranty. By September of 2023 this current door has also warped.

I went into the show room to explain the situation and they explained that yes, they have been having issues with these types of doors from the manufacturer, and have now stopped selling them.

After some back and forth they explained that they could continue to replace the front door like for like repeatedly from the same manufacturer for as long as the warranty is valid (In theory another 5 years),
OR they could install a new door and door frame from their current range for £1700 (normally £3400) with a new 10 year warranty.

What are my rights considering it seems I'm continuously being given a faulty replacement product?  It seems the company no longer supply's doors in a similar price range to what I previously paid so It's not as easy to ask them to change to a new manufacturer. I'm on a budget so paying extra for a new door isn't possible at this moment in time.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is the issue with guarantees and warranties, they are not legally binding in the uk, they appear to only be deemed as a gesture of goodwill on behalf of the retailer/manu under your consumer rights/laws. Sadly they are not worth the paper they are written on. 

however, they've done you good to date.

Under your consumer rights/laws, should something be deemed not to be 'fit for purpose', dependant upon the time involved since 'ownership' there are various rules etc. Should we equate what has happen to you in relation to these, 'whomever' has had their 'one chance' to repair and that has 'failed' again.

As the above has happened, this puts you in the position of being entitled to request a full refund of the original cost.

now where that would leave you financially, i don't really know,  regarding the cost of installing another type of door or if you should have to pay at all to replace it with one of a satisfactory design, even if more expensive.

one thing that interests me here is the apparent? admittance of this being a know manu fault, thus inherent at birth so that very much strengthens your position under your consumer rights, though as i said i'm not sure where you stand on this and if you could force free installation of a different but satisfactory door from the retailer.

what was the full original installation cost you paid please?

as if this was nearer or better than their quoted £1700 you could be on a winner here as should you raise a court court claim for the org cost i'm pretty sure you'd win using consumer right act.

dx 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please will you tell us the name of the company.

I notice that you have withheld this and it isn't too clear why you want to protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the guarantee might be helpful in this case. We would have to know more about it.

Please can you post a link to it. Presumably it is somewhere on the Internet. And as I have pointed out above, you haven't given us the name of the supplier and that is really unhelpful.
I can only imagine that you are trying to protect them in some ways that are not sure why this would be.

Was the door fitted by the supplier or somebody else?
I understand that they told you verbally that this item had been withdrawn because there was a design fault and that they had several instances of exactly the same thing occurring before – but do you have any written evidence of this? Have you found anything on the Internet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening both,

Thanks for your replies. The company in question is Thistle Windows & Conservatories Ltd.

THISTLE.GROUP

Homepage, Thistle Windows based in Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire is your local...



The original Price of the door and fitting £1627 including VAT. The doors was Manufactured by Solidor but supplied by Thistle.

I believe there is a Manufacturers guarantee as well as the installers guarantee. And both have upheld this so far.

@BankFodder Your correct, unfortunately they only said that they have been having issues with Solidor quality in the conversation we had in person. I have read up on the doors though and it appears I'm not the only one to have had these defects.

There is no sign of the guarantee online, but will have it printed with the paperwork so will attach a copy when possible.

I've contacted Thistle asking who now makes their current line of doors as it is not clear. I suppose it boils down to what options do I have. ?

- Keep replacing the door under warranty and hope the next is better than the last
- Pay the discounted price on the "Superior" door they have in Thistles current range
- Hold out and demand that the current door be replaced with an improved spec one

Thanks.



Thistle Windows & Conservatories 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please monitor this thread for a reply tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago you told us that you would post up a copy of the guarantee but this still hasn't appeared.

We need you to react quickly please. Please will you let us have this information as it is essential.

In terms of your statutory rights, it is certain that you are covered by the consumer rights act 2015.

The consumer rights act 2015 requires that when you buy goods, they are satisfactory quality and that they remain that way for a reasonable period of time.

I have difficulty imagining that a door should not last for at least 20 years or so. Unless you can tell us something about the door which makes it particularly fragile and unlikely to go the distance.

If that's the case, then it is clear that they are in breach of contract despite their efforts to replace the door each time. The fact that they have had to replace the door on three occasions since 2019 – and in fact twice this year is very high quality evidence that the because they are supplying are not of satisfactory quality.
So in terms of your statutory rights, you would be entitled to sue them and I would say that you would be entitled to demand a replacement door as close as possible to resisting door and specification.
If that now means that the only door they supply is substantially more expensive than that is simply too bad for them. They will have to step up to the mark.

The only thing is that you have had broadly four years use out of the door and so any award under the consumer rights act would be calculated around the cost of a new door plus its installation – to equivalent or closer specification to yours (rounded up – not rounded down) less for years as a percentage of the total life expectancy.

This would mean that if it can be agreed that the life expectancy of the door is, say, 24 years – then you would be entitled to recover the cost of the new equivalent door plus installation -1/6 of the price to represent the four years value that you have enjoyed so far.

Please let me know if you don't understand this.

There's not much more we can say the moment because you have noy let us have sight of the guarantee. 
Over to you


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@BankFodderThistle Windows T&C.pdf

Apologies for the late reply, I'm still working away so things are difficult on my end.

Please find the T&C's attached that I have. Although they don't appear to be much help in the matter.

It seems that as you said, I'll need to find out the expected life value of the door to work out how much they would be obliged to recover in fees.

Let me know what you think.

Much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell us a bit about the door. Its construction and who is the manufacturer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all it certainly seems that the company is attempting to conduct itself responsibly and they are not trying to put one over on you.

However, despite their efforts they aren't really matching up to their statutory obligations.

You say that there is a manufacturers guarantee – but we haven't seen this but the most recent document you have posted up claims a 25 year guarantee for the door furniture so I would say that it would be reasonable to argue a 40 year life expectancy for the entire door – at least.

How many properties do you know where they have to replace the front door every 10 years? At 1700 quid for a door, that would mean about 50p a day for your front door. They wouldn't sell any.

So on that basis I think you need to start off by calculating the difference between the price that you paid and the cost of the only other door that they now offer which I understand is substantially more expensive.

Then deduct from that your five years use based on the life expectancy of 40 years.

Come back and tell us how much that is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on a 40 year life expectancy the £3400 door would be 23p per day.
Based on a 40 year life expectancy the £1700 door would be 12p per day.

5 years of use of the £1700 door = £219 

Difference in door price = £1700

£1700 - £219 = £1481 (Difference in door price - 5 years of £1700 door use)

So that could be how much I receive back if I was to take this further? that being the case then £1700 off the new door they are offering can be considered to be a good offer. as £1700 off of new door price is better than £1481 I would receive back?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that I gave you the original formula but I'm struggling now to understand the information!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me a few minutes to get my head round it as well!

Essentially the money they are offering me off the price of the replacement (but more expensive door)  is greater than the money I would receive back if I was to pursue legal action [original door cost - usage cost]

If I was to get the original [door - usage] cost back, I would then need to find another suitable door and pay a similar price to the original £1700.

I suppose although the offer of 50% off of the the more expensive replacement door sounds good. I would still be out of £3400 after it is all said and done. I'm just resentful to pay that when the original door should be fit for purpose.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still can't get my head round it. I will come back trying to give a reply tomorrow.

However, you made a contract with them for a door which would last without any problems for 40 years and that's what you are entitled to even if it costs them more.
You shouldn't have to pay a single penny more than you originally paid.

That is the working legal principle

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to summarise this:

  • You bought the door for (let's say) £1700.
  • It is not fit for purpose/satisfactory quality.
  • They offered to keep on replacing it.
  • Alternatively they offered you 1700 quid of the cost of a £3400 door.


In your opening post you said that they were offering to replace the door on a like for like basis for the remaining duration of the warranty.

How can they do this if the door is no longer made? What are they proposing?

If it really is like for like then that would have to be the solution. There would be no basis for you insisting on a £3400 door.

Have you seen satisfactory doors from any other supplier/installer?

I'm especially interested in the "like for like" point. If there really is like for like then that has to be the solution and you don't have any choice. We haven't discussed this very much
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your correct in your summary @BankFodder

 

The fitter (Thistle) have said they're happy to keep replacing the door (manufactured by SOLIDOR)  even though Thistle no longer stock/sell them in their current range.
They would be going back to the manufacturer and requesting a replacement. There is another 5 years on the original door guarantee - so in theory this could end up with a door being replaced every year for the next 5 years if the doors are defective.

The idea of replacing a door every 5 years at Thistles expense has crossed my mind, it's just a real pain and I'd rather nip it in the bud.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, as already discussed, their warranty doesn't really mean anything. 

40 years is a reasonable life expectancy for a front door under consumer law, so this should be pointed out to your supplier and ask if they really want to commit to constantly replacing a poor quality door for 40 years, or take the easy way out and just replace it with decent quality door once...

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nicky Boy would the manufacturers guarantee on the door normally  be for each new one installed? or the guarantee period started from when the first door was installed. ?

I was led to believe Thistle would honour it for the the 10years from when the original was installed?
If it would be for every new door then indeed it could be up to 40 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's not every five years is it. They are offering to replace the doors every time they are needed for the 10 years from the beginning of the original installation.
They are saying that at the expiry of the 10 years from your original installation, there will be no more free doors even if the latest door to be installed fails again even within a few months of its installation

Link to post
Share on other sites

depends if the new door being fitted comes with a guarantee from solidor, surely it would.

i will suspect the 10yrs warranty is that of installation, so is through thistle and that to date thistle have/are claiming the doors cost back off of solidor via their product guarantee to them.

but what incentive does that give for thistle to install anything that goes beyond their 10yrs.... urmm.

it might come to the fact that when the 10yrs installation expires, you have a good cause to approach solidor directly, as had they given an appropriate replacement in the 1st place or later, even if more expensive, it's certainly cost them double that to date.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, So it seems that every summer the door has warped from Solidor.  So could be replaced after each summer for the next 5 years.

 @dx100uk  As you said ,Thistle would be claiming the door cost back from Solidor each time.
Is it worth just continuing along this path (getting a door replaced each year), and approach Thistle with the facts that this will cost them in the long run? so it would make sense to fit the better door to them?

If they do turn around and say they'll replace the door each time, the after the Guarantee finishes they wipe their hands of the matter? what would be my actions then? Approach Solidor themselves?

Link to post
Share on other sites

sideshow - my son lives in a ex council estate near me, all have these solidor doors are exactly the same, each summer the bottom panel warps in the summer . the council comes around and replaces them, 23 of 'em each year ...it's totally mad. the next thing totally mad thing is that he bought the home outright but the council insist that as they are failing under whatever guarantee/warranty and they were the original fitter upper before they were put on the market , they are obliged to change them..

his elder next door neighbour has been in the estate since 1962 and says they've done this for about 20yrs! they have a warehouse full of the same door just in diff colours that they swapout across numerous estates every year its like painting the forth railway bridge:pound:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...