Dick Smith won't issue refund for faulty 'new' goods without original packaging.

Forums › Off topic › Dick Smith won't issue refund for faulty 'new' goods without original packaging.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

1916 posts

Uber Geek

#914521 14-Oct-2013 06:56

surfisup1000:
johnr: Why you would take it back 1 day after purchase without the packaging is beyond me

Because by law the packaging is not required for a refund /replacement.

Quite simple really.

I havent read all the posts so forgive me if it's been mentioned.

The packaging is part of the product, it's like returning the printer without the ink. End of story.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#914530 14-Oct-2013 07:57

Every time I've returned something to a retail store, I've asked if the original packaging is required and I always get a no. Like my girlfriend on Saturday returning her smart-phone as it was faulty. Original packaging was not required. She took the phone in with all its components and recieved a new one as it was within 30 days. That was a Vodafone store.

I had trouble returning a DVD recorder to DSE, but not due to packaging. They refused to replace it as they were a "franchise" and I had to go in to central auckland or Orewa to replace it. Thee Warkworth branch only sold the products. I called bull and they caved...No way I was traveling an hour just to get another faulty product, which is what I ended up getting anyway. We had to go back four times!

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#914533 14-Oct-2013 08:17

After considering the above comments, I probably should have returned with the packaging -- but, at the time I thought they'd just give us a replacement unit from an unopened box and take the faulty unit back.

While by law I think I was right, I can understand the store might like to get the packaging back just for convenience sake. The best outcome would have been for DSE should to issue the refund and ask my mum to drop in the packaging next time she was in town.

Thanks for any thoughts on this.

Inphinity

2780 posts

Uber Geek

#914536 14-Oct-2013 08:37

surfisup1000:
While by law I think I was right, I can understand the store might like to get the packaging back just for convenience sake. The best outcome would have been for DSE should to issue the refund and ask my mum to drop in the packaging next time she was in town.

Thanks for any thoughts on this.

"By law" they met their obligations by providing an offer of repair.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#914539 14-Oct-2013 08:46

if it is a substantial fault then you are entitled to a refund under the Act. The act does not prescribe conditions concerning packaging.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#914550 14-Oct-2013 09:00

johnr: Why you would take it back 1 day after purchase without the packaging is beyond me

I aways keep original packaging for the term of the warranty on major items..

Regards,

Old3eyes

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#914557 14-Oct-2013 09:18

Inphinity:
"By law" they met their obligations by providing an offer of repair.

I don't agree -- under the CGA, for serious faults, they must offer a refund. Repair is not an option they can force on you. I'd think this is even more the case given the product is faulty out of the box.

From consumer magazine...

"If the fault is serious

When the fault is serious, cannot be repaired or causes a safety risk then the consumer has the choice to:

get their money back
get a replacement
keep the goods but get some of their money back in compensation.

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

andrewNZ

2487 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#914558 14-Oct-2013 09:18

KiwiNZ: if it is a substantial fault then you are entitled to a refund under the Act. The act does not prescribe conditions concerning packaging.

surfisup1000:
Inphinity:
"By law" they met their obligations by providing an offer of repair.

I don't agree -- under the CGA, for serious faults, they must offer a refund. Repair is not an option they can force on you. I'd think this is even more the case given the product is faulty out of the box.

From consumer magazine...

"If the fault is serious When the fault is serious, cannot be repaired or causes a safety risk then the consumer has the choice to:

get their money back
get a replacement
keep the goods but get some of their money back in compensation.
"

Whether it is a substantial/szerious fault or not, can only be established by having it looked at, "won't print" is a symptom not a fault. As has been said, it could easily be due to user error or improper setup, like as not removing all the weird little packing clips and holders, or plugging the USB lead into the Ethernet port (I've seen that one a few times).

Until the actual fault has been established, it's a basic return and requires packaging.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#914561 14-Oct-2013 09:28

andrewNZ:
KiwiNZ: if it is a substantial fault then you are entitled to a refund under the Act. The act does not prescribe conditions concerning packaging.

surfisup1000:
Inphinity:
"By law" they met their obligations by providing an offer of repair.

I don't agree -- under the CGA, for serious faults, they must offer a refund. Repair is not an option they can force on you. I'd think this is even more the case given the product is faulty out of the box.

From consumer magazine...

"If the fault is serious When the fault is serious, cannot be repaired or causes a safety risk then the consumer has the choice to:

get their money back
get a replacement
keep the goods but get some of their money back in compensation.
"

Whether it is a substantial/szerious fault or not, can only be established by having it looked at, "won't print" is a symptom not a fault. As has been said, it could easily be due to user error or improper setup, like as not removing all the weird little packing clips and holders, or plugging the USB lead into the Ethernet port (I've seen that one a few times).

Until the actual fault has been established, it's a basic return and requires packaging.

That can be established with out the packaging. A policy cannot supersede statutory rights.

Inphinity

2780 posts

Uber Geek

#914570 14-Oct-2013 09:33

KiwiNZ:

That can be established with out the packaging. A policy cannot supersede statutory rights.

Unless I have misread the OP, though, they were more than happy to send it for repair without the packaging, they were just not prepared to issue a full return/refund without it.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#914571 14-Oct-2013 09:35

KiwiNZ:

That can be established with out the packaging. A policy cannot supersede statutory rights.

If the shop has to send it on to somewhere else then surely the supplier has the right to ask for the original packaging.
How is the shop going to send it off without packaging?

Goosey

2829 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#914574 14-Oct-2013 09:37

Interesting;

Why would you drive miles with a piece of kit bouncing about and getting scratched in the boot etc without its packaging, is mind bogling espcially when the retailer could claim the purchaser did the damage themselfs (causing the fault).

Now see this; http://www.dicksmith.co.nz/our-returns-policy
doesnt mention anything about returning products with original packaging (Which quite a few retailers state in their returns policy). Id say some numpty at DSE forgot to write this in and now the store workers have to deal with returns without the original packaging. Thats attention to detail for ya !

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#914575 14-Oct-2013 09:38

Inphinity:
KiwiNZ:

That can be established with out the packaging. A policy cannot supersede statutory rights.

Unless I have misread the OP, though, they were more than happy to send it for repair without the packaging, they were just not prepared to issue a full return/refund without it.

That is not prescribed under the act therefore by trying to enforce a condition that attempts to supersede statutory rights would be acting ultra vires.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#914576 14-Oct-2013 09:39

Klipspringer:
KiwiNZ:

That can be established with out the packaging. A policy cannot supersede statutory rights.

If the shop has to send it on to somewhere else then surely the supplier has the right to ask for the original packaging.
How is the shop going to send it off without packaging?

errr bubble wrap and boxes, something my support teams would do daily.

Inphinity

2780 posts

Uber Geek

#914583 14-Oct-2013 09:45

KiwiNZ:
That is not prescribed under the act therefore by trying to enforce a condition that attempts to supersede statutory rights would be acting ultra vires.

Given we have little to no detail of the fault or cause, it's a stretch to categorise this immediately as a 'serious issue'. As such, the CGA states

The retailer decides the remedy. You can ask them to fix the item, but the retailer can choose between repairing it, replacing it, or giving you a refund.

And in this case, the retailer has chosen to repair it.

Of course, if it were clear that the issue was one that should fall in to the 'serious' category, things change.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8