Consumer rights

[User]

 

[fossyant]

3 months is unacceptable. Replace or refund. No skin of his nose as he can send them back.

 

[Supersuperleeds]

The store manager is correct, due to the timescale they can repair or replace, it is their choice. If he has a good relationship with his supplier then he might be able to send them back for a full refund/replacement, in which case as fossy says why wouldn't he replace or refund.

 

[Fnaar]

I have absolutely no idea I'm afraid, so any comment from me would be entirely superfluous

 

[Supersuperleeds]

[QUOTE 4373140, member: 45"]Is there a set timescale?[/QUOTE]

30 days per Consumer Rights Act

 

[jefmcg]

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/Public/Campaigns/cra/ConsumerRightsSummary-GoodsF2F.pdf

 

[stephec]

I have absolutely no idea I'm afraid, so any comment from me would be entirely superfluous

In that case you could at least sling a Miss Goodbody joke in.

 

[Fnaar]

In that case you could at least sling a Miss Goodbody joke in.

Miss Goodbody has a similar problem with her new boots. She says the velcro fastening chafes her inner thigh, and catches on her earrings.

 

[Supersuperleeds]

[QUOTE 4373173, member: 45"]Thanks.

So, the store manager was incorrect in that he was talking about sending them back to the supplier for the supplier to decide whether to repair or replace (so the store wouldn't lose out), whereas the repair/replace agreement is directly between me and the store (so the store might lose out)?

It annoys me when suppliers insist on the response that means that they don't lose anything.

I assume from the Which report that I could argue against repair because it would cause me significant inconvenience -they're the only pair of motorbike boots I have and I'd have to shell out for an intermediate pair or ride in shoes with no protection.[/QUOTE]

No the shop is well within his rights to send the product to the supplier to see if it can be repaired, though yes you could argue that you would be significantly inconvenienced. To be honest a decent shop would just replace them for you and then take it up with their supplier for a replacement/refund.

 

[stephec]

Miss Goodbody has a similar problem with her new boots. She says the velcro fastening chafes her inner thigh, and catches on her earrings.

Does it also catch on the strap on.....












...her boots?

 

[Levo-Lon]

I had a sole come away on some Frank Thomas Boots after a good while ..the shop just changed them without any arguments..it was the Honda agent mind and not a clothing outlet type bike wear shop..

just had a vist today from homeserve to check the mattress on our 13 month old new bed..he said the mattress was faulty and it will be replaced ..

 

[Rooster1]

Sounds like he's possibly had the same conversation about the same product before ?

 

[Levo-Lon]

Thats a pitty their usually really helpful, it is a hot day i guess

 

[jefmcg]

though yes you could argue that you would be significantly inconvenienced.

As I understand it, he would be massively inconvenienced. Assuming he wouldn't ride without a pair, he'd have to either stop riding or buy a second pair. I think this is a good example where replacement is the only option.

Which the shop did, eventually - so I guess it's all good in the end.

 

[Levo-Lon]

[QUOTE 4373215, member: 45"]It is bad design. The velcro overlaps onto the boot lining, so it's always going to happen. Not had much joy with RST gear so far.[/QUOTE]

its not the best im affraid..
i liked Hein Gericke ,sidi and Dainese..as a go to brand.
i have a superb pair of touring boots size 8.5 9 from Gericke your welcome to if its your size @User make a good spare or wet wether boot..