Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1

    Section 75 claim issue

    As the retailer was ignoring section 24 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 by offering a replacement and not a refund for a folding mobility scooter that had gone faulty twice within 6 months, a section 75 was sent to Barclay Card on 18th March along with proof of the earlier repair.
    In the meantime the trader collected the faulty scooter and left a loan scooter that needs to be dismantled to load into the vehicle. The trader still has the scooter although they did try to return it after repairing it for a second time after being advised of the rejection. They were asked to collect the loan scooter, but never made an appearance.
    On 3rd May I contacted BC again by phone to get an update and was told that I needed to prove that the contract between the trader and myself had been broken or that there had been misrepresentation. I told the person on the phone that I had already supplied all the proof. BC then sent a letter asking me to get an independent assessment on the scooter however the trader still has the scooter.

  2. #2
    On 15th May I contacted BC again only to be told what i was told on the 3rd. I told them that as 8 weeks had passed since raising the initial request I would be contacting the Financial Ombudsman. I was then told that as I had only raised the complaint on the 3rd May I had to wait another 6 weeks before I could approach the Ombudsman.
    The trader is clearly ignoring their responsibilities under the CRA 2015. The trader by offering a replacement has clearly indicated that there is or was an issue with the scooter however they should also be offering a refund under section 24 of the CRA. The trader was sent two registered letters the first in March outlining the issues with the scooter and the second just over a week ago giving them 7 days to respond and advising them that under S24 of CRA 2015 they are obliged to refund the consumer. No reply as yet.
    I am fighting the CC company and also the trader and think they are trying to wear me down however I am going to persevere as it is time companies woke up to their responsibilities.

  3. #3
    You say that you're using your right to cancel, which is correct as they get one chance to repair then you get this right under the CRA.

    However, while you say that it has failed twice within 6 months, did you use your right to cancel within that period.

    See these following bits from the CRA relevant here:

    (8) If the consumer exercises the final right to reject, any refund to the consumer

    may be reduced by a deduction for use, to take account of the use the consumer

    has had of the goods in the period since they were delivered, but this is subject

  4. #4
    A consumer who requires or agrees to the repair of goods cannot require the

    trader to replace them, or exercise the short-term right to reject, without giving

    the trader a reasonable time to repair them (unless giving the trader that time

    would cause significant inconvenience to the consumer).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts