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 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#916148 16-Oct-2013 15:40

Goosey: 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 !

That is, only if you purchase a product expecting it to be faulty or develop a fault during the warranty period.

I think you will find that the original box criteria is for when you return a product because you have changed your mind, not for fault products. Are people really expected to keep boxes and original packaging for the length of the warranty period? What about when a brand new refrigerator or bed is delivered and the company takes the packaging with them? Or where is one meant to store a refrigerator box for a year or however long?

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#916158 16-Oct-2013 15:56

andrewNZ:
hashbrown:

Come on. You gave examples of someone plugging USB into and Ethernet port and not removing all packaging as common faults. Surely a "Techspert" can troubleshoot those.

I'm hearing a lot about retailers problems with their suppliers/staff, and not a lot of good justification why those should then become the consumers problems.

I did. I stand firmly by my opinion.

A "Techspert" may or may not be able to troubleshoot those issues. You can't tell where a customer plugged in a cable, and they'll swear black and blue they did it right. If you insist they screwed up and send them on their way, they'll invoke the CGA and think they have a right to an instant refund. THEY DON'T.

A "Techspert" not solving an issue does not instantly make the issue a serious fault, it makes it an unknown fault, which can still just as easily be user error. Until the problem or fault is identified, it can't be termed major or minor.

I'll give you an example of why I don't think in store staff "experts" should be troubleshooting issues.
A long time ago, my family purchased a good VCR, for a fairly hefty price. The device developed tracking problems, and so we took it back.
The "technician" in the shop tinkered with it and made it work, said it wasn't a tracking problem, and it was fixed. We took it home, and the problem came back a few months later, so we took it back again. The "technician" in the shop tinkered with it and made it work, said it wasn't a tracking problem, and it was fixed...
This went on forever, the problem was never solved, and the VCR was eventually dumped.
Talking to a professional some years later, we discovered that there was a known issue with the tracking circuit in those devices that would have been fixed if the guy in the shop just asked the manufacturer, or any expert.

In the OP's case, the retailer acted in good faith and offered an immediate refund if the original packaging could be supplied.
This gives the customer the refund they want, so they can purchase a new printer, and it gives the retailer the option of reselling the product if it turns out to be user error or a minor fault.

What an interesting example. I guess it depends on whether or not the consumer is happy to take the faulty product back a second and subsequent times and have someone tinker with it out the back and return saying "it's fixed". I guess logic would tell me that after the second fault I would want it properly looked at, and I also wouldn't want the shop to troubleshoot anything but the basics anyway. In front of me...

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#916169 16-Oct-2013 16:08

andrewNZ: OH FFS, THE PRODUCT MUST BE RESALABLE IF NO FAULT EXISTS.

OH FFS, how about testing the product first without packaging and if it proves to be in perfect working order and you as the retailer decide for some reason to give a refund, insist for the damn packaging then? Either way it seems that the product will most likely be sent off for testing regardless, so why can't the decision on packaging be made only if and when it is actually needed???

Why is the default position that the consumer is wrong and the product is fine? I don't find it fun to have to return products to stores, especially on the day of or day after purchase!

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#916170 16-Oct-2013 16:09

Satch:What an interesting example. I guess it depends on whether or not the consumer is happy to take the faulty product back a second and subsequent times and have someone tinker with it out the back and return saying "it's fixed". I guess logic would tell me that after the second fault I would want it properly looked at, and I also wouldn't want the shop to troubleshoot anything but the basics anyway. In front of me...

To be clear, "tinkering" is not what I had in mind here. Just following the same steps the customer claims to have made, and confirming if the fault either exists or doesn't.

For a printer that's,

Plug it in
Install drivers
Print a page
Tell customer if you printed a page

If you can't print a page, you took the customers money and gave them a piece of crap in return. They've then wasted time and possibly more money troubleshooting, and driving back to your store. Stop worrying about whether you can resell the piece of crap and give them their money back or a replacement.

andrewNZ

2487 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#916178 16-Oct-2013 16:18

hashbrown:
Satch:What an interesting example. I guess it depends on whether or not the consumer is happy to take the faulty product back a second and subsequent times and have someone tinker with it out the back and return saying "it's fixed". I guess logic would tell me that after the second fault I would want it properly looked at, and I also wouldn't want the shop to troubleshoot anything but the basics anyway. In front of me...

To be clear, "tinkering" is not what I had in mind here. Just following the same steps the customer claims to have made, and confirming if the fault either exists or doesn't.

For a printer that's,

Plug it in
Install drivers
Print a page
Tell customer if you printed a page
If you can't print a page, you took the customers money and gave them a piece of crap in return. They've then wasted time and possibly more money troubleshooting, and driving back to your store. Stop worrying about whether you can resell the piece of crap and give them their money back or a replacement.

In my example, the guy was supposed to be a technician, and he also owned the place. Ultimately the guy was useless.

nickrout

219 posts

Master Geek

#917445 19-Oct-2013 16:28

michaelmurfy:
surfisup1000:

Sorry, I have to correct you as your knowledge of the law is quite wrong.

For major faults, they must give the option of replacing/refund for major faults (and this was major).

Why would they try to resell a faulty unit anyway?

I've worked for 5 major retailers, and even for major faults you always had to send the product away, what you call a major fault might be in fact minor and if there was a major fault you still shouldn't have thrown the box away, the retailer still has the right to send it off for a repair and if they can't repair it then they can offer a replacement or a refund. Else you'll be getting all customers saying they've got a major fault.

The retailer still has to repair the unit, they've paid for it to sell, but nobody will buy a unit that has no box. If you had the box it'll be fine but without a box they make a loss from an unsellable product or a product they have to sell below cost due to the fact it doesn't have a box.

Would you pay full price for a product that's clearly used and doesn't have a box?

You are right that there has to ba a major fault before the right to a refund comes in, and especially in tech goods the room for operator error must be high. But I think you probably had a retailers spin put on the CGA at your 5 major retailers!

Martin_NZ

130 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#917575 19-Oct-2013 23:12

Bottom line is that packaging should be returned where possible however it's not a legal requirement. If its an out of box failure it would be reasonable to expect the packaging to still be available. Fact is most people throw away packaging once their item is unpacked and setup. If it was a failure a week later it would not be reasonable to insist on packaging being returned.

If a quick appraisal in the store shows it's an out of box failure it should be replaced on the spot. If it cannot be replaced due to lack of stock an alternate should be offered, but if that is not acceptable to consumer a refund should be issued without question. Its basic customer service 101.

A customer with an out of box failure should never be dicked around by telling them it needs to be sent away for repair. They have entered a contract and paid money in good faith expecting, quite rightly that a brand new product will work when purchased. From a legal point of view if it does not work then the sale and purchase contract is void and the customer is entitled to a full refund. This is a point of law regardless of what the salesman tells you, or whatever the small print in their "policy" states. It is not lawful for a retailer or in fact anyone to attempt to contract out of a consumers statutory rights.

Far too few consumers are aware of their rights and far too many retailers try to avoid their obligations.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

andrewNZ

2487 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#917617 20-Oct-2013 07:31

Satch:
andrewNZ: OH FFS, THE PRODUCT MUST BE RESALABLE IF NO FAULT EXISTS.

OH FFS, how about testing the product first without packaging and if it proves to be in perfect working order and you as the retailer decide for some reason to give a refund, insist for the damn packaging then? Either way it seems that the product will most likely be sent off for testing regardless, so why can't the decision on packaging be made only if and when it is actually needed???

Why is the default position that the consumer is wrong and the product is fine? I don't find it fun to have to return products to stores, especially on the day of or day after purchase!

You sir, missed the point.
Our friend @hashbrown thinks the retailer should issue an immediate replacement or refund without packaging, or properly identifying the fault. Every reasonable retailer in the country will, quite rightly, tell him to go jump in the lake.

I have never said packaging is required for a final resolution (neither has DSE for that matter), it IS required if you hope for an immediate resolution.

hashbrown

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#917695 20-Oct-2013 12:33

andrewNZ: Our friend @hashbrown thinks the retailer should issue an immediate replacement or refund without packaging, or properly identifying the fault. Every reasonable retailer in the country will, quite rightly, tell him to go jump in the lake.

Given there are several posts in this thread giving examples of Harvey Norman, Noel Leeming and Vodafone doing exactly that, I'm going to assume you're trolling. I'm out.

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#917731 20-Oct-2013 14:03

hashbrown:
andrewNZ: Our friend @hashbrown thinks the retailer should issue an immediate replacement or refund without packaging, or properly identifying the fault. Every reasonable retailer in the country will, quite rightly, tell him to go jump in the lake.

Given there are several posts in this thread giving examples of Harvey Norman, Noel Leeming and Vodafone doing exactly that, I'm going to assume you're trolling. I'm out.

Agreed. I've got no more time to waste on this either.

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