Warranties, terms and conditions

[Danny M2ZParticipant @dannym2z]

G'day. I just received my latest copy of MEW #247 and it included a useful catalogue from ARC.

On reading the T&C (ARC) I was disappointed to read that the customer bears all postage costs for shipping defective/warranty items (both ways).

I do not know what 'loophole' in the law allows this but surely if the item is 'defective' then it's the vendor's problem and they should bear the shipping costs. QC is at their end!

But then if the purchaser changed their mind or ordered the incorrect item then the vendor should be entitled to recover costs as they are not liable for the customers stupidity.

This is not a dig at ARC btw as many other companies seem to impose the same T&C's

At the end of the day, is there an independent arbitrator of such matters?

* Danny M *

[Danny M2ZParticipant @dannym2z]

Why should the customer pay postage for defective items?

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Danny,

Hopefully, Ketan will be along promptly and explain to your satisfaction … but meanwhile, let me just add two more quotations [from the on-line, U.K. version]:

Return of Damaged or Faulty Goods:

On receipt of goods, we will inspect the same for damage or fault. If we agree to the customers damage/fault observation, we will refund the full cost of the goods including prior agreed carriage back to us, or, replace the product/s and include a refund for the prior agreed carriage incurred by the customer to return the product/s back to us, as appropriate.

….

By purchasing from and browsing through this Website, you acknowledge and accept these terms and conditions.

MichaelG.

[michael howarth 1Participant @michaelhowarth1]

The Consumer Contracts Regulations require the supplier of defective goods to bear the cost of return.

Mick

[Martin 100Participant @martin100]

Posted by mick H on 24/01/2017 07:47:54:

The Consumer Contracts Regulations require the supplier of defective goods to bear the cost of return.

There is no mention of the term defective goods in The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (which replaced the previous distance selling regulations)

For returns other than defective the onus is on the seller to specify those costs at the time of the original contract or otherwise the seller bears all those costs.

The applicable legislation for defective goods is

The Consumer Rights Act 2015

This replaced The Sale of Goods Act, The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations and The Supply of Goods and Services Act.

Section 20 Right to reject

"Whether or not the consumer has a duty to return the rejected goods, the trader must bear any reasonable costs of returning them"

[Ketan SwaliParticipant @ketanswali79440]

Hi Danny,

This applies specifically to Dannys question with regard to overseas sales:

I understand where you are coming from. What you have stated comes out of our terms and conditions for overseas customers (excluding U.K. & EC Terms) from this link. For overseas customers, this is strongly worded with reference to cost of returns. I am sorry to say that this came about mainly from certain cases we had, specifically from Australia, at the time when we used to accept PayPal. Without getting into detail, a minority of customers at the time wanted things for free.

However, we treat each overseas situation on a case by case basis. Here are examples of overseas sales with issues within the last few weeks, and how we dealt with them:

1. SX1LP went to France..Got smashed in transit… replacement sent yesterday. Looking at the pictures of smashed machine – no point to bring it back (at our cost), so we agreed with the customer that he sould keep the smashed bits. No cost to the customer.

2. New wedge type toolpost 111 went to Sweden. Original catalogue and web picture shows product with ground bright finish on dovetail. Eventually when goods came in, checked and sent, they are ground and then black finished. He was unhappy, and we agreed to have it back becasue he had purchased based on ground bright finish. Picture has been updated now. He did not agree with our comments. We agreed to take it back and pay return carriage, because he had purchased on the basis on the original picture on the website, and this observation was critical. In his case, we also agreed to refund the original outgoing cost based on this. He then said he lost the packing, and we still agreed to accept it based on the original observation. Total costs well over £60.00. He does not wish to talk or deal with us… and he does not want to return the post.

We aim/try to treat people the way we would like to be treated. Our Terms for overseas sales are strong to protect all concerned, and at the same time designed to deal with certain people who we wish to avoid.

For U.K. sales, the terms are here. they are clear, and in compliance with current U.K. regulations, which by the way are now more loaded in the sellers favour. Again, we aim to treat a person in the way we would like to be treated. Where we have made a mistake, we correct it and pay the costs of return. For damaged or faulty goods, again, we bare the costs both ways, and/or deal with situation with the person concerned to come to a workable solution. Still we have some people (extreamly few) who think we work like 'an email fashion outlet like Next for example', and demand that we pay carriage both ways – the initial outgoing and return, for something they ordered incorrectly. We point them to our Terms.

Ketan at ARC.

[Author]

Posts