Expert Needed!!

[Graham]

If you keep your claim to less than £5k, it should stay in the small claims court and you shouldn't have to pay the other sides legal costs (despite their threat).
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla..._e/law_taking_legal_action_e/small_claims.htm

 

[Cycleops]

Think you may be on a hiding to nothing as the changed seatpost makes the bike 'modified'. But thats my take. Trouble is the internet makes everybody an expert, myself included, so you can discount most of the advice.

 

[Globalti]

You're right but like a few others on here, this kind of bullying make my blood boil. The shop has an obligation to replace the bike, modified or not and I would go to a solicitor and use on them the same threatening tactic they have used. Then I would go to a Small Claims Court.

 

[Lanzecki]

Can we see the damage? Please? Pretty please?

 

[Manonabike]

Everyone has suspension in their seat. The suspension is normally referred to as a pair of buttocks!

I have followed this thread with some interest but I have to say that I'm now bored with it.

For all we know, any of us could do business with the company in question and find ourselves in the same position as the OP in months to come when it could have been prevented or at least knowing there was a chance of things going wrong.

 

[53-11]

OK.

I don't have permission, but the bike shop is MSG bikes and the bicycle is a Bernds LS Folding tandem.

 

[Pale Rider]

OK.

I don't have permission, but the bike shop is MSG bikes and the bicycle is a Bernds LS Folding tandem.

If Brompton made a tandem....

http://www.msgbikes.com/BerndsFoldingTandems

 

[Lanzecki]

So it's this?

Where did it fail? At a guess I'd say just in front of the front pedals. While the need to fold does affect the design, it shouldn't fail in general use. Last time I'll ask. Can we see pictures of the failure?

Since it's steel a competent welder would fix it easily enough.

 

[Pale Rider]

So it's this?

Where did it fail? At a guess I'd say just in front of the front pedals. .

From the OP's posts, I think you're right.

I wouldn't normally urge someone to sue, but this couple should.

The case will be decided by a county court judge who will apply common sense rather than engineering or cycling expertise.

The bike is a premium product, advertised as being able to carry a high payload - 260kg according to the website - so it must be sturdy.

It is unlikely two elderly people would be inclined to abuse it, or even be capable of doing so.

To suggest changing the rear saddle has anything to do with a catastrophic frame failure flies in the face of common sense.

The bike is only a few months old, so the couple are entitled to a proper repair, but more likely a refund.

 

[53-11]

I will ask him for the pictures but can't promise anything. He has taken some though so it should be possible.

You are right about the location of the failure. It was a cold lapped joint on the underneath of where the folding mech meets the tubular frame. There was no penetration of the weld into the plate. If either MSG or Bernds had ever asked to see the bike they would have worked this out for themselves, but they were more interested in saving themselves money and hassle.

Perhaps it can be fixed, but the joint itself is a dreadful, appallingly badly designed item (if it hadn't come apart you would never have known). The in-laws have really taken fright about it and don't ever want to ride the bike again.

 

[Pale Rider]

. If either MSG or Bernds had ever asked to see the bike

Another good point in your favour should you decide to sue.

 

[matthat]

I've found this thread interesting and hope that the ppl involved get to the bottom of it!! I struggled with specialized and a main dealer in north west 3 yrs ago! my value was considerably less and wish i'd argued more because i'm now forking out for a new bike!! Good luck

 

[53-11]

OK. So it turns out that MSG cycles have seen this thread. Good - I've got a few more points to make directly to you.

to be continued....

 

[matthat]

Any Updates??

 

[spacecat]

It seems MSG are hiding behind the terms and conditions of the warranty...........shame on them! Any warranty does not,and can not affect statutory rights, which often exceed rights under a warranty.

It is not 'fit for purpose' and has not lasted 'a reasonable amount of time' in fact warranty clauses can often be worthless if they are deemed in court to be unreasonable. This sounds, and would sound, to any rational person to be unreasonable.

Reading this thread has made me angry. Please let us know how you get on.