Cannondale quick problem

[bonsaibilly]

It comes with the FD not the chainset.

You're right, but it doesn't affect this thread anyway.

 

[bonsaibilly]

Well if they believe the damage is down to you, they will need to explain to you how they think you did it..

I thought that burden of proof lasted six months, after which the plaintiff would need to explain to the supplier how they think the product was defective?

 

[bonsaibilly]

You've had plenty of advice on how to go the legal route. But before you bring out the wig and gavel, get a photo of the damage on here. It may help if you know what the cause is before seeking compensation.

That would require effort and commitment and common sense.

Another vote for a small claim if they still refuse to sort it.

But there's no point in threatening, you have to be prepared to follow it through.

There is a fee, a percentage of the claim, if I recall.

Of course, you won't be claiming for a full bike, just the frame and labour rebuild cost.

If they contest it, you will have to go to court, so have a think about the venue in terms of travelling time for you.

The court hearing is informal-ish and will be heard by a district judge who, while not a cycling expert, should have plenty of common sense.

I think you have a good chance of success, because when you stand up and tell your story he will see you weigh less than his left leg and will likely conclude such a light person shouldn't break an expensive bicycle.

Sorry, but that's a lot of nonsense. There are many ways to break a product, and please tell me, what is the body weight in law where the threshold lies in the case of client vs bike maker?

 

[bonsaibilly]

My bike is not with me at the moment, but as I recall there was a small black bracket which the bolts go through into the frame. On the ladies version the frames narrows at this point and my repair shop said they thought it was a design error.

Tip for the future when handling any issue where you're saying x is a problem: take pictures before you pass the item onto the person you're complaining to.

If I were Cannondale's lawyer I would take "my repair shop... thought it was a design error" with a pinch of salt.

 

[Drago]

what is the body weight in law where the threshold lies in the case of client vs bike maker?

The balance of probabilities, somewhat lower than the beyond reasonable doubt threshold of a criminal court.

 

[RoubaixCube]

Decided to look into Cannondale frame warranties and googling them brings up multiple threads & 1 or 2 blogs about how cannondale and/or their suppliers/distributors tried to fob their customers off by throwing up silly excuses to avoid replacing the damaged frame, which is exactly the same shoddy behavior i am seeing here..

I was exceptionally keen on picking up a Synapse Alloy 105 - Ive already bought hubs & disc rotors to have new wheels built. but reading what i already have leaves an extremely bad taste in ones mouth.

Customers have gone into long drawn out battles to have their frame warrantied and Cannondale have denied and fought against them every step of way to the point where legal action was threatened which forces them to backtrack & U-Turn quicker then trump can scream 'fake news' then all of a sudden its about 'grey areas' and 'good will' gestures.

Absolutely abhorrent behaviour from one of the bigger and more popular brands in cycling. Im not super keen on the Giant either but its either the Contend SL 1 Disc or I keep looking.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

Decided to look into Cannondale frame warranties and googling them brings up multiple threads & 1 or 2 blogs about how cannondale and/or their suppliers/distributors tried to fob their customers off by throwing up silly excuses to avoid replacing the damaged frame, which is exactly the same shoddy behavior i am seeing here..

I was exceptionally keen on picking up a Synapse Alloy 105 - Ive already bought hubs & disc rotors to have new wheels built. but reading what i already have leaves an extremely bad taste in ones mouth.

Customers have gone into long drawn out battles to have their frame warrantied and Cannondale have denied and fought against them every step of way to the point where legal action was threatened which forces them to backtrack & U-Turn quicker then trump can scream 'fake news' then all of a sudden its about 'grey areas' and 'good will' gestures.

Absolutely abhorrent behaviour from one of the bigger and more popular brands in cycling. Im not super keen on the Giant either but its either the Contend SL 1 Disc or I keep looking.

Each and every case should be viewed on its individual merit. It is no use arguing (you didn't) that because a company has a bad reputation, that case X is an example of obligation avoidance. Let's analysis this case as and when the evidence is before us.

 

[tuggy]

Decided to look into Cannondale frame warranties and googling them brings up multiple threads & 1 or 2 blogs about how cannondale and/or their suppliers/distributors tried to fob their customers off by throwing up silly excuses to avoid replacing the damaged frame, which is exactly the same shoddy behavior i am seeing here..

I was exceptionally keen on picking up a Synapse Alloy 105 - Ive already bought hubs & disc rotors to have new wheels built. but reading what i already have leaves an extremely bad taste in ones mouth.

Customers have gone into long drawn out battles to have their frame warrantied and Cannondale have denied and fought against them every step of way to the point where legal action was threatened which forces them to backtrack & U-Turn quicker then trump can scream 'fake news' then all of a sudden its about 'grey areas' and 'good will' gestures.

Absolutely abhorrent behaviour from one of the bigger and more popular brands in cycling. Im not super keen on the Giant either but its either the Contend SL 1 Disc or I keep looking.

Update on the case in question. I have now been offered a cannondale Carbon 1 for 700 plus vat. Or carbon 2 for 600 plus vat . What are your thoughts please

 

[tuggy]

Up date on the case in question. I have now been offered a cannondale Carbon 1 for £700 plus vat or carbon 2 for 600 . Your thoughts please.

 

[Milkfloat]

Up date on the case in question. I have now been offered a cannondale Carbon 1 for £700 plus vat or carbon 2 for 600 . Your thoughts please.

Why would you want 2 bikes the same? After all you would not accept this offer without replacing your original bike under warranty would you?

 

[vickster]

Will it come with a warranty worth the paper it's written on?

Personally, I'd be seeking financial compensation and then buy a different bike. I'd not feel confident having the same again even if there's a hint of a potential design fault

 

[Yellow Saddle]

Up date on the case in question. I have now been offered a cannondale Carbon 1 for £700 plus vat or carbon 2 for 600 . Your thoughts please.

Only you can decide.

 

[Drago]

I'd seek to get your existing bike fixed for free first. Its a crap warranty if you have to spend £700 to get any kind of satisfaction.

 

[tuggy]

I hear what you have all said. The only problem with taking this further and not accepting their offer will be that I am without my bike and the weather is getting better. I do agree with you all that I should stand my ground . Still not sure what to do , I don't want a fight on my hands or a long drawn out saga. Can't decide

 

[Pale Rider]

That would require effort and commitment and common sense.



Sorry, but that's a lot of nonsense. There are many ways to break a product, and please tell me, what is the body weight in law where the threshold lies in the case of client vs bike maker?

It's how small claims are decided - the judge weighs up all aspects, so in the case of something like a broken bike a claimant who is light will be thought less likely to have broken the bike by abusing it.

The judge will also carefully weigh up the person - does he/she appear to be sensible, truthful, respectable, etc.

Then the judge answers the question: "On the balance of probabilities has this person broken their bike by abusing it, or is the failure more likely to be a result of a manufacturing or design defect?"

That could go either way, and someone betting on court results probably wouldn't make a lot of money.

But in this case it looks likely to me it would go in favour of the consumer.