unbelievable halfords customer service

[trebor]

I never thought I would find anywhere that had worse customer service than NTL, but I have now. Halfords have astounded me and sunk to bottom of the abyss with this one.
Here's the tale, I purchased a satnav from halfords which is faulty so I tried to take it back, no chance, both the duty manager and manager say "satnavs are non refundable" (they are having a laugh surely) but no they stick to their guns, so we ring customer service from inside the store and get told the same thing (well at least they are all singing from the same hymn sheet).
Time passes the argument goes back and forth but they wont give in, so I ask to speak to the area manager, they wont tell me who he is or how to contact him, ok, I ask for their surnames to complain about them to head office, they wont tell me (you can guess what I was thinking by now).

So with a parting comment involving swearing off I go to trading standards, the guy in there has a similar reaction to mine when I tell him whats happened. So he rings them and guess what, they tell him the same thing, "satnavs are non refundable" so on the argument goes again, but still halfords will not refund me. So thats me and trading standards sat there in disbelief at halfords complete lack of awareness of customer rights.

Where now......... I have written to one of Halfords directors in a last attempt to get them to see sense before I take them to the small claims court, I am not hopeful.

I will have a refund in the end they have not got any other option, but I am completely gob-smacked by their attitude and the only other thing I can say on this matter is for goodness sake don't shop in Halfords

[Jules]

They are breaking the law by doing this surely?

[TheDaddy]

Sound advice about not shopping at Halfords, have you seen the price of their oil?. Seriously though good luck with it.

[Derek]

http://www.uknetguide.co.uk/Shopping...er_Rights.html

How long did you have the satnav before you tried to take it back?

Regardless it sounds like they are trying to pull a fast one and trying to ignore basic customer rights until they are challenged with legal actions. (Not entirely dissimilar to a certain UK cable company whose staff were told numerous times what they wanted us to do was actually legal when it plainly wasn't)

[daz300]

this link may help you

Consumer Direct - help and advice for consumers in Great Britain

link: http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/you...s/fs_c04.shtml

Refunds

You are entitled to your money back if there is a fault with the goods, or they are any of the following:

• Unsatisfactory quality
• Not fit for their purpose
• Misdescribed (not what they are supposed to be)

You must be able to prove that the fault was present when the goods were sold. The burden of proof is on the consumer.
Even if you have used the goods a few times, you are probably still entitled to a refund. However, if you have had some use from the goods, the trader may make a reduction from the original price when refunding the money.
If you have not had a reasonable opportunity to check the goods, you could possibly be entitled to a refund if you complain at a later date.
However, since the 31st March 2003, the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations give you parallel or alternate rights. Instead of a refund, you may choose to ask for a replacement or a repair. Goods which do not conform to the contract within the six months after they were delivered are presumed to have been faulty when you got them. In these cases, you do not have to prove the fault was present when the goods were sold. Instead, the trader must prove that the fault was not present when the goods were sold. The burden of proof is on the trader.
If a repair or replacement is not available or turns out to be unsuitable, you could then ask for a refund.

you can ring them on 0845 040506 Calls to the Consumer Direct 0845 numbers are charged at no more than four pence per minute from a BT landlin

[trebor]

Originally Posted by dezzo

http://www.uknetguide.co.uk/Shopping...er_Rights.html

How long did you have the satnav before you tried to take it back?

Regardless it sounds like they are trying to pull a fast one and trying to ignore basic customer rights until they are challenged with legal actions. (Not entirely dissimilar to a certain UK cable company whose staff were told numerous times what they wanted us to do was actually legal when it plainly wasn't)

purchased on a friday, tested over the weekend, attempted to return it on monday.
I think I have the uk's only satnav device which is lost and doesn't know where it is.

[Minbu]

Write to one of the directors and ask them to explain why their company is refusing to comply with the Sale of Goods Act. Tell them they have 14 days to reply before you take legal action to enforce your rights without further notice. That should force them to change their minds.

http://www.halfordscompany.com/hal/ah/board/

SALE OF GOODS ACT

Relevant or Related Legislation:
Sale of Goods Act 1979
Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994
The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002

Key Facts:
• Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time" (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances).

• For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit.

• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).

• If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty).

• After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

[budwieser]

Originally Posted by trebor

purchased on a friday, tested over the weekend, attempted to return it on monday.
I think I have the uk's only satnav device which is lost and doesn't know where it is.

Just a thought mate, Did you set it up correctly and allow it time to lock on to one of the orbiting satallites as per the instructions?
If not, try disconnecting your car battery for 30 mins,then reconnect it and try setting it up all over again so it loses its memory.

[Wicked_and_Crazy]

why cant they replace it with one that works?

[nffc]

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023045.htm

[Matthew]

What is their reasoning for not refunding it?

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Matthew

What is their reasoning for not refunding it?

because if you read the ACTUAL SoGA (not one sanitised by Consumer Direct) they aren't obliged to. It's a common consumer misconception that they are. They are obliged to offer a refund, replacement or repair, any repair must not cause the customer undue inconvenience, and the cost of the repair not be disproportional to offering a replacement.
The choice is arranged between the consumer and the retailer.

From the link i posted:

48B

Repair or replacement of the goods


(1) If section 48A above applies, the buyer may require the seller -

• (a) to repair the goods, or
  
  (b) to replace the goods.
  

(2) If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods, the seller must -

• (a) repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;
  
  (b) bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).
  

(3) The buyer must not require the seller to repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods if that remedy is -

• (a) impossible, or
  
  (b) disproportionate in comparison to the other of those remedies, or
  
  (c) disproportionate in comparison to an appropriate reduction in the purchase price under paragraph (a), or rescission under paragraph (b), of section 48C(1) below.
  

(4) One remedy is disproportionate in comparison to the other if the one imposes costs on the seller which, in comparison to those imposed on him by the other, are unreasonable, taking into account -

• (a) the value which the goods would have if they conformed to the contract of sale,
  
  (b) the significance of the lack of conformity, and
  
  (c) whether the other remedy could be effected without significant inconvenience to the buyer.
  

(5) Any question as to what is a reasonable time or significant inconvenience is to be determined by reference to -

• (a) the nature of the goods, and
  
  (b) the purpose for which the goods were acquired.
  

48C Reduction of purchase price or rescission of contract


(1) If section 48A above applies, the buyer may -

• (a) require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods in question to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or
  
  (b) rescind the contract with regard to those goods,
  

if the condition in subsection (2) below is satisfied.

(2) The condition is that -

• (a) by virtue of section 48B(3) above the buyer may require neither repair nor replacement of the goods; or
  
  (b) the buyer has required the seller to repair or replace the goods, but the seller is in breach of the requirement of section 48B(2)(a) above to do so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the buyer.
  

(3) For the purposes of this Part, if the buyer rescinds the contract, any reimbursement to the buyer may be reduced to take account of the use he has had of the goods since they were delivered to him.

48D Relation to other remedies etc.


(1) If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods the buyer must not act under subsection (2) until he has given the seller a reasonable time in which to repair or replace (as the case may be) the goods.

(2) The buyer acts under this subsection if -


(a) in England and Wales or Northern Ireland he rejects the goods and terminates the contract for breach of condition;

(b) in Scotland he rejects any goods delivered under the contract and treats it as repudiated;

(c) he requires the goods to be replaced or repaired (as the case may be

I also don't see the point of the "burden of proof" thing - if something's under warranty, then it's covered anyway, and the retailer proving the fault wasn't there is a bit strange if a repair/exchange is going to be booked under warranty (which is additional to legal rights). Outside the six months then the consumer has to prove the fault but if it's U1 then it will still be under warranty.

Only outside the warranty period does it become more difficult - but the onus is on the customer to prove the fault was inherent, and as the product gets older it gets more difficult to do this under "not fit for purpose" because it could be argued that the buyer has had x years' use out of the product.

Originally Posted by trebor

snip

[/B]

Which Halfords trebor? If the one in stockton I'm not surprised, the staff their can barely scrawl an X for a signature, the women are only concerned with flirting with the male members of staff and the men all hang out in losersville.....oh I mean the custom car section which is full of not very cheap tat.

[Dan_Sette]

There is a consumer advice programme on local BBC in the West Midlands. Hosted by a gent called Ed Doolan (he's world famous in Birmingham)

A number of his listeners have rung his show to complain about Satnavs in Halfords (in Birminghams' response).

It seems it is a standard policy to say Satnavs aren't refundable.

Until Birmingham Trading Standards got involved and set up a test case with one of the complainants issuing the documents to take Halfords to the small claims court.

It didn't get that far. They resolved all the complainants problems at a stroke and put up a senior manager on the radio to apologise and say it was a matter of lack of staff training in this area which, of course, was going to be imediately rectified.

So, go for it. Hit 'em with the paperwork.

D

[handyman]

Originally Posted by nffc

because if you read the ACTUAL SoGA (not one sanitised by Consumer Direct) they aren't obliged to. It's a common consumer misconception that they are. They are obliged to offer a refund, replacement or repair, any repair must not cause the customer undue inconvenience, and the cost of the repair not be disproportional to offering a replacement.
The choice is arranged between the consumer and the retailer.

From the link i posted:
[b]



I also don't see the point of the "burden of proof" thing - if something's under warranty, then it's covered anyway, and the retailer proving the fault wasn't there is a bit strange if a repair/exchange is going to be booked under warranty (which is additional to legal rights). Outside the six months then the consumer has to prove the fault but if it's U1 then it will still be under warranty.

Only outside the warranty period does it become more difficult - but the onus is on the customer to prove the fault was inherent, and as the product gets older it gets more difficult to do this under "not fit for purpose" because it could be argued that the buyer has had x years' use out of the product.

For trading standards/ courts they consider anything in the 1st 4 weeks of ownership can be dealt with by repair unless the consumer states the would like a refund which they are entitled to as they can state the goods where not of merchantable quality. After 4 weeks it's up to the retailer to offer a repair, if they do this they are 100% within their rights even if they direct you to the manufacturer for repair.

At least thats how it was explained to me as a retailer by trading standards.