mattwnz:

throbb: 

The fault is not serious, read the definition of a serious fault. Just because the vacuum isn't working doesn't make it a serious fault.

The retailer has done what they should reasonably do and what a reasonable person would accept.

How do you know it is not serious? It doesn't work... they won't even look at repairing it to even assess what is wrong. Doesn't get much more serious than that. The consumer affairs definition of serious fault is when the goods are substantially unfit for their normal purpose and they can't easily be made fit for the purpose or this can't be done within a reasonable time. As the retailer isn't even prepared  to get it looked at for repair, it would be considered a serious fault, due to them not attempting to remedy it. Anything uneconomical to repair would be a serious fault, which they have pretty much admitted by refusing to even attempt to repair it.

What is your definition of a serious fault then?

If it was a broken piece of plastic, or faulty switch that can be replaced, then that wouldn't be serious, if economical to repair.

• a reasonable consumer would not have bought the goods if they had known the nature and extent of the fault

• the goods are significantly different to a description given or to a sample or demonstration model

• the goods are substantially unfit for their normal purpose and they can't easily be made fit for the purpose or this can't be done within a reasonable time

• the goods are unsafe - e.g. a bicycle has faulty brakes.

mattwnz:

Hence why I am referring to consumer websites, which explain it far better,  and clear up the grey areas with examples.  That is why they exist!

Dunnersfella:

mattwnz:

Hence why I am referring to consumer websites, which explain it far better,  and clear up the grey areas with examples.  That is why they exist!

To be fair, the consumer website has a relatively easy job...
They're saying things that people want to hear.
You're reading it the way you want to, and that's cool. But really, you're the only person on here who thinks the retailer isn't doing what they're supposed to.

throbb:
Simply because its not working does not make it a serious fault, now if there was a history of this model of vacuum dying after 12 months then you might have a case.

The retailer has choose to offer you a refund as was one of there options by law. You have the option to take it or leave it.

mattwnz: 
Yes, but it is my choice whether to accept a refund as a solution according to the consumer website, where the fault is substantial. It is my choice whther to accept a refund, replacement or repair.  It is not as though they couldn't get a replacement either if they tried, but they haven't even offered to try, which I don't think is good customer service. 

surfisup1000:

mattwnz: 
Yes, but it is my choice whether to accept a refund as a solution according to the consumer website, where the fault is substantial. It is my choice whther to accept a refund, replacement or repair.  It is not as though they couldn't get a replacement either if they tried, but they haven't even offered to try, which I don't think is good customer service. 

I'm not sure that fact it was on sale and you cannot get a similar price today could be considered a consequential loss.  But, maybe a sympathetic adjudicator might side with you?

Agree about customer service aspect .  I've been to the disputes tribunal 4 or 5 times and won every time but I wouldn't take a case like this to them. 
 

mattwnz: . I have another appliance that matches this one, so any replacement has to be the same. So will update this thread once I have got it resolved one way or another.

Actually just read the manufacturers warranty contract , and that says the manufacturer will either repair or replace, and no mention of refund. So if the retailer doesn't come come to the party, I will just invoke that warranty contract with the manufacturer. In my case it looks easier, provides more protection and less ambiguity that you get with the CGA, in this particular circumstance. I have another appliance that matches this one, so any replacement has to be the same.
So will update this thread once I have got it resolved one way or another.

Toledo:

Actually just read the manufacturers warranty contract , and that says the manufacturer will either repair or replace, and no mention of refund. So if the retailer doesn't come come to the party, I will just invoke that warranty contract with the manufacturer. In my case it looks easier, provides more protection and less ambiguity that you get with the CGA, in this particular circumstance. I have another appliance that matches this one, so any replacement has to be the same.
So will update this thread once I have got it resolved one way or another.

Just one other thing you may want to check in their warranty before you go down that route.... Batteries are considered a "consumable" (and only have a minimal warranty) in most warranties and if the battery is the cause of the issue and they find that when you send it to them then they are within their rights to charge you a no fault found inspection fee - usually around $50. In fact you are lucky the retailer has not already thought of this possibility. I don't know the design in question but I wouldn't think its particularly good for batteries to be on charge for the last year and only actually had use 5 (probably short) times.

I agree the situation is a little less "clear cut" than usual but totally agree with everyone else - Just take the refund.

Toledo:

Actually just read the manufacturers warranty contract , and that says the manufacturer will either repair or replace, and no mention of refund. So if the retailer doesn't come come to the party, I will just invoke that warranty contract with the manufacturer. In my case it looks easier, provides more protection and less ambiguity that you get with the CGA, in this particular circumstance. I have another appliance that matches this one, so any replacement has to be the same.
So will update this thread once I have got it resolved one way or another.

Just one other thing you may want to check in their warranty before you go down that route.... Batteries are considered a "consumable" (and only have a minimal warranty) in most warranties and if the battery is the cause of the issue and they find that when you send it to them then they are within their rights to charge you a no fault found inspection fee - usually around $50. In fact you are lucky the retailer has not already thought of this possibility. I don't know the design in question but I wouldn't think its particularly good for batteries to be on charge for the last year and only actually had use 5 (probably short) times.

I agree the situation is a little less "clear cut" than usual but totally agree with everyone else - Just take the refund.

Elpie:

Toledo:

Actually just read the manufacturers warranty contract , and that says the manufacturer will either repair or replace, and no mention of refund. So if the retailer doesn't come come to the party, I will just invoke that warranty contract with the manufacturer. In my case it looks easier, provides more protection and less ambiguity that you get with the CGA, in this particular circumstance. I have another appliance that matches this one, so any replacement has to be the same.
So will update this thread once I have got it resolved one way or another.

Just one other thing you may want to check in their warranty before you go down that route.... Batteries are considered a "consumable" (and only have a minimal warranty) in most warranties and if the battery is the cause of the issue and they find that when you send it to them then they are within their rights to charge you a no fault found inspection fee - usually around $50. In fact you are lucky the retailer has not already thought of this possibility. I don't know the design in question but I wouldn't think its particularly good for batteries to be on charge for the last year and only actually had use 5 (probably short) times.

I agree the situation is a little less "clear cut" than usual but totally agree with everyone else - Just take the refund.

Hate to be adding my $0.02c but this happened to me a few years back - handheld Black & Decker vac, stopped powering, and the retailer sent it off for repairs. It came back working BUT I was charged for a replacement battery pack AND for the service charges. I had assumed it was a faulty appliance whereas it was a dead battery pack. I used it rarely and believing that a dead vac that was still under warranty was a retailers and/or manufacturers problem I asked for it to be repaired. The battery pack was out of warranty and the cost became mine. 

One of the stores still selling this model may allow you to test your vac in-store. If it is the battery unit you then have the option of getting a new battery unit (most likely at your expense - check the warranty carefully) or of taking the original offer of your money back. 

Jaxson: Sorry, just saw this thread "Faulty vacuum, and retailer not replacing it." and thought... That sucks!...