PC World Won't Repair/Refund After 28 Days

[Guest retailerspointofview]

again instead of just hitting quote to my comments.. read the relationships between the two parties.

 

the seller is the original owner of the product and the buyer is the new owner.

 

the contract is where money is exchanged for the ownership of the product.

 

not the person or the address the deal was done.

think of it this way. if the sales person quit or the £100,000 deal to buy 1000 ink cartridges was done over a cup of coffee at starbucks does this make starbucks bound to the contract??

 

the stores do not own the product. the stores do not even keep the money it all goes to to the company. the company are responsible for the product. if it fails or is impossible to repair the product it is the company who have to find a alternative remedy or recind the contract. if they do not do so then the company have to go court.

 

customers going to a devision of the company where it is 100% obvious that they dont have time, parts or expertise to repair printers, camera's or PC's is a simple time waster.

 

if the company refuses to deal with it then yes customers have a case. but if the store refers the customer to the company contact details then this should be done.

[spikeachu]

Well, i'm pretty much going to give up on this one now.

 

All I will say is that the store would prefer the customer to follow their policy. However, policy differs from statutory rights and consumer law. If it came down to these entities in court, there's only one winner.

 

RPOV, contacting the support line is the easiest and quickest method of acquiring service for lots of people, seemingly yourself included and most people do not have a problem with this. But there are people who will prefer to deal directly with the store and, regardless of what the store say, this is their right.

 

'I know the DSGi retail environment inside out, having worked in many DSGi departments. But running a big operation does not negate any company from it's legal obligations.

but advising customers to ignore the techguys, customer services department and return straight to pcworld stating its their right that the store deals with it..

sounds like you (an employee of the company) are advising customers of the least convenient method of finding a remedy.

you still sure you know it inside out.'

To answer the above. I have not advised anyone to ignore the repair departments. I have corrected you in advising that there is no legal premise for consumers to do this. You seem to be stating that there is.

 

I will not be feeding anything back to my boss as I no longer work for PC World. You have customer services number if you'd like to feed it back on my behalf.

 

You're obviously the all knowing being when it comes to retail law, just ask anyone on this board. If you feel you could do my former job, let me know the address of your shop, i'll ensure you get an application form. Although in all honesty, it involves taking in and digesting information before providing a response. I'm not sure it's for you.

 

If you want my opinion, I think your 'little shop' is a PC World store. Why else would you be trying to justify store policy as overriding law? You also seem to have a lot of reasonably accurate information about store policy, diary systems and what access store staff have to repair costs, stock purchase price etc. Are you going to tell me that these are lucky guesses?

As this has suddenly turned into a personal attack on me and how I perform in my employment, I really have nothing more to say on this matter.

[Robertxc]

This thread is getting a bit heated in places. Please keep it friendly, so that I don't have to start moderating posts/users. Also, it's really not a good idea to use odd colours of text - especially on a blue background. It makes it very difficult to read.

 

The argument on this thread seems to be going in circles. In a nut-shell, I would say that if I bought a Netgear router from PC World in Edinburgh, and it packed in after a couple of months, I would take it back to PC World in Edinburgh and I would expect them to remedy it. I wouldn't entertain any suggestion that they weren't liable. I'm 100% confident that I would have the force of the law on my side. How they remedy the situation is not my concern, but they would have to remedy it.

 

The analogy of the deal in Starbucks is false. If the person selling the ink cartridges happens to be doing it on behalf of Starbucks then of course they're liable. If he's doing it on behalf of PC World while in Starbucks, then obviously PC World are liable because he's acting on their behalf. I would have thought that was blindingly obvious.

 

 

[Guest retailerspointofview]

 

If you want my opinion, I think your 'little shop' is a PC World store. Why else would you be trying to justify store policy as overriding law? You also seem to have a lot of reasonably accurate information about store policy, diary systems and what access store staff have to repair costs, stock purchase price etc. Are you going to tell me that these are lucky guesses?

 

not a lucky guess at all.. when i first started my idependant store 10 years ago it was just a consumables store. after seeing the competition such as time, tiny and pcworld i learned a few tactics to get my store more profitable.

i have in recent years been entering the pcworld store in my town and buying things which i need that day and cant wait for suppliers delivery times. and over the years i have just asked simple questions to get a idea of the policies they have in place, incase i was doing anything to inconvenience my customers more then i should.

 

over the years i have learned alot, build up a great relationship with the staff and they even know me by name. which is strange for many staff in a chain store to remember a customer for more then 20 minutes.

 

i like researching things. finding out facts and learning. thats why i am into computers and not bird watching. because computer move and change alot faster then birds.

 

i know personally on a saturday my little shop is too busy dealing with sales etc to have time to inspect machines for faults and so i accept the machine in at look at it on sunday.

 

because i build the PC's i dont have to contact the manufacturer for them to repair it as i am the manufacturer. but one thing i do know 100% and thats valid in my shop and retail chains.

 

the SOGA contract is a exchange of OWNERSHIP in exchange for cash. my saturday worker who sits at the till does not own the product before taking the money of the customer. neithe do store level staff. who does.. i do and the top cheese CEO of companies. and it is the owner who can authorise who they accept/ allow to do refunds, repairs or replacements. trust me i dont want my thursday delivery boy repairing PC's or handling customers money.

 

deal with me thanks im always in the shop.

 

obviously CEO's have more fish to fry then the occassional repair and so they authorise at the stores to do:

* refund

* repair

* replace

IN THE FIRST 28 DAYS and then refer to the head offices authorised route which another poster called it oasis i think. to find out who head office authorises to rememdy the solution.

 

the telephone support team have authority of items over £100 after the 28 days or they can give you the details of who can.

 

refunds after 28days with items over £100 need authorisation of head office or the call centre. store staff cannot do this as they have no idea of cost price of product, cost of repair. etc so are unable to make that decision.

 

the policy is there as a method of ensuring the customer receives a fast effective solution to the issue. legally without the policies stores, help desks etc can just pass the cotact details of the companies legal team or board level directors CEO's etc as that is who owned the product and has the money.

 

just imagine that lol!!!

 

imagine any retail chain like ebay...

 

the store is ebay

the sales person that takes your money is paypal

the seller is head office

the buyer is you.

 

yes you can use ebay to contact the seller and get the seller to repair the item. you can also get ebay to contact them on your behalf.

 

but you cannot DEMAND that ebay courior it from you and repair it. only the maufacturer or sellers authorised repairer is legally bound to SOGA.

 

ebay and stores are contact points. go betweens, time savers. but going to a devision of a company that cant deal with it (my thursday deliveryboy) is not right and will just get you frustrated.

 

my reason for posting was that i originally come on here because of a customer saying they know their rights they been to this website and blah blah blah.

 

they were conpletely wrong but i thought i would check this website out. there is no main thread for independant computer shops but because i have struck up a good relationship with pcworld staff and some of the complaints would also apply to my lil shop i find it valid to ensure people know their rights

[Guest retailerspointofview]

This thread is getting a bit heated in places. Please keep it friendly, so that I don't have to start moderating posts/users. Also, it's really not a good idea to use odd colours of text - especially on a blue background. It makes it very difficult to read.

 

The argument on this thread seems to be going in circles. In a nut-shell, I would say that if I bought a Netgear router from PC World in Edinburgh, and it packed in after a couple of months, I would take it back to PC World in Edinburgh and I would expect them to remedy it. I wouldn't entertain any suggestion that they weren't liable. I'm 100% confident that I would have the force of the law on my side. How they remedy the situation is not my concern, but they would have to remedy it.

 

again LEGALLY your rights as a consumer are with the owner of the product whose address is in hemel hempsted. so forgetting company policies and stuff you would have to contact hemel hempsted as they are the owners. if the loca branch moved you have lost nothing as the contract is not with the local branch.

 

it is the previous owners who authorise who can and cant deal with it. and this is so that it does not affect consumers rights. going to the wrong devision of the company forcing them to unscrew a printer there and then to remove your childs crayola which fell inside could invalidate your rights. going to a printer specialist which the previous owner reccomends does not.

 

The analogy of the deal in Starbucks is false. If the person selling the ink cartridges happens to be doing it on behalf of Starbucks then of course they're liable. If he's doing it on behalf of PC World while in Starbucks, then obviously PC World are liable because he's acting on their behalf. I would have thought that was blindingly obvious.

it is a bit of an exadduration using starbucks i agree my point is simple though the contract is not about where you buy it but who owned the inks first and who has the money.

the previous owner at hemel hempsted now have your money. so they are who your legal rights are with. if however they authorise any store to refund the £100,000 of inks then great. but on such a value i dont think they would let a store make that decission.

 

thus my point all along

if its over 28days from purchase and over £100 call the telephone number on the receipt for advice first.

some items like xbox, routers and desks dont have a repair option and so a replacement or refund are left, which head office would normally allow stores to do if tested as faulty. but this is not every xbox, router or desk. so for easiest solution call the call centre first.

[Robertxc]

again LEGALLY your rights as a consumer are with the owner of the product whose address is in hemel hempsted.

But, presumably if I've gone into PC World and handed over my cash, then I am now the owner, not someone in Hemel Hempstead, and since I bought it from PC World in Edinburgh, any dispute is between me and them.

 

I'm sorry retailerspointofview, there isn't really any way to sugar coat it, you're just wrong. Consumer laws have been set up precisely to address the situation you describe. There's simply no getting round the fact that if you approach a trader and buy something, then that trader is liable for any defect.

 

This from the BBC:

The Sale of Goods Act

 

If you buy goods from a trader, The Sale of Goods Act says they must be:

• 
  
• of satisfactory quality - which means the product you buy should be reasonably reliable.
  
• fit for purpose - which means it should perform the function you bought it to do.
  
• as described - means it should be exactly what the trader told you it was.

If something you buy doesn't meet these standards, and you return it to the trader quickly, you're entitled to a refund, replacement or repair.

 

The Sale of Goods Act holds true for second-hand goods as well, but takes into account that the quality should simply be what you could reasonably expect from that product, given its age and how much it has been used.

 

If the goods are less than six months old, it's up to the seller to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After six months, it's up to you. Of course, this assumes that the goods were expected to last six months.

[Parva]

I've lost the will to live on this thread! RPOV is insistent that we phone Head Office and save petrol. I'm pretty sure I could start a poll asking whether you returned a printer to the store or phone Head Office and I'll bet I get 9/10 returning personally.

 

Whatever your views RPOV the fact is that the consumer would generaly prefer to deal with people face to face rather than over a phone line. Consumer law also says we can return it to the store within its 12 month guarentee (and yes, I am aware of other issues).

 

The £100 figure you mentioned is absolute rubbish, the store manager has the ultimate say in this. I personally have had items replaced well over this value without me personally having to speak to Head Office!

 

I hope we can bring this to a close now.

[Darren]

 

only the maufacturer or sellers authorised repairer is legally bound to SOGA.

 

 

 

what you are saying is, if I bought an ink cartridge from you and it didn't work, YOU are not bound by SOGA

 

you have a business degree? - you should take it back to where you bought it and get a refund under SOGA, because its obviously not fit for purpose

[gyzmo]

what you are saying is, if I bought an ink cartridge from you and it didn't work, YOU are not bound by SOGA

 

you have a business degree? - you should take it back to where you bought it and get a refund under SOGA, because its obviously not fit for purpose

:lol: Good one!

[Guest retailerspointofview]

your SOGA contract is between the previous owner of the product (seller) and the new owner of the product (buyer)

 

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

 

it does not matter the venue the contract is formed as your rights are always with the seller/original owner.

 

again and again and again

legally your pcworld contract is with the owner whos registered address is at hemel hempsted. so if you had any issues with it then legally head office are accountable to rememdy it.

 

robertxc

the original owner is the registered company address at hemel hempsted as this is where your money end up. the original owner is the seller. the new owner is the buyer. the store is just a venue, a point of contact. not legally bound.

unless the owner authorises the venue to deal with it and the venue refuses then the owner is in breach.. again not the venue. the owner then either has to find a alternative remedy or recind the contract.

the money you pay the edinborough store does not stay instore or go to a back account in the name of the edinborough store. or go directly in the pockets of the local store staff. it goes into a bank account at the registered address of hemel hempsted.

 

 

parva

only 20% of products have store level authority. store managers can if they wish to be helpful and break his own authority level if it benefits the company and customer but he does not have to

especially if it can get him sacked for something that dont affect him personally. store staff cannot get sued under SOGA. they can be used as witnesses etc to prove what was said and done/not done but they cannot be sued. ultimately the hemel hempsted address have the contract they just allow staff to deal with issues as they arrise.. but if it costs too much to deal with instore, wastes precious time of their under staffed employees then they will not deal with it but refer you to head office or a department that can.

 

 

due to time restrictions etc the head office authorise different people, contractors, service centres, and employees to deal certain issues as this helps the customer rather then going gown the legal route which is the last thing anyone wants. but ultimately it is head office of chain stores or the owner of small sole trader shops that have their neck on the block. not the employees, side devisions or sub contractors.

 

holding a store accountable and saying it is not legal for them to inform you that they cannot repair the fault and ask you to contact the head office is rediculous.

 

the law no where states that the venue the contract was made is legally bound.

 

otherwise that is just like saying that farepack customers have to stand on there own door step and demand action.

also it would be like saying joe blogs sitting at starbucks buying ink cartridges from a sole trader. now he has to return to starbucks..

NO NO NO its with the original owner. not the venue.

 

the employee's, sub contractors,agents, enginners etc can deal with it as a good will/customer service issue to get it remedied quickly not as a legal issue. but if they fail or it is impossible to remedy it is the head office that have to find an alternative solution.

 

big companies have policies to help the company reduce how many requests for repairs they receive directly and to help customers get it dealt with faster.

 

if there was no policies at all then you would have to write to hemel hempsted for every fault.

 

but the policies help you. all i am saying is ensure you understand that the delivery boy in my shop cant be sued because he cannot repair a PC. if you have an issue you come to me!!!

 

pcworld stores can deal with ANYTHING in the first 28 days and on many items after 28 days.

 

General rule if its under £100 the owner of the product has authorised its employees instore to deal with it. if it is over £100 and is repairable such as laptops etc then the store dont have the parts to fix it.

other items which are not repairable COULD(not that many though) be dealt with in the local stores.

 

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.

 

if the company HQ, head office, owners of product fail to deal with the issue then you can sue them. but store level staff asking you to contact the owner of the product or the owners authorised repairers or even the manufacturer in the first 12 months is not illegal.

 

telling you to escalate the issue is advice. is customer service. is benefitting you. you could be waiting months for store staff to go through a nvq to repair the fault. or to be free to contact head office on your behalf. but legally they dont have to.

 

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).

 

if i moved my shop or that edinborough store was to close it does not matter.. the contract is not with the store. its with the registered company address.. HEMEL HEMPSTED

[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?

[Guest retailerspointofview]

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]

 

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]

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 %*&!%*%

 

 

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

[Guest 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]

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]

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

[Guest retailerspointofview]

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.