Richer Sounds: What are my rights?

[admin_exported]

Hello All,

I would really appreciate it is someone could please help with regard to a purchase of a Denon AVR that is turning sour.

As you can see I have had a problem with a faulty AVR. Could anyone please advise as to how I get my money back or a replacement. I would point out that RS have been less than helpful. I only had the product for little over a month and now have to wait another month (without a temporary replacement) until such a time as I get a response

I do not want the AVR repairing upon the assumption that the product will be backwards and forwards until such a time as the warranty expires and /or they gloss over the root cause. Besides which, I bought New and expect it to work!! The AVR was bought as part of a package costing £1250 (with kef speakers) Would sincerely appreciate any help/advice! Can I get my money back?

EDIT: As it is clear to see (Below), I believe I have been somewhat hasty in my judgement of Richer Sounds customer service to the point that I believe I have provided something of an injustice. While an initial impasse at branch level may have left me somewhat despairing of customer service generally. I would point out that the service, and understanding, which I have since received (both from the branch and the customer service function) has been first class. I’ve actually been quite impressed and can’t recommend RS enough.

I would point out that the unit was returned (from testing) to the local branch yesterday. This is far in excess of the time I had initially anticipated. Had I been a little more patient I could have forgone my current embarrassment (this is me eating humble pie!).

Further to the issue regarding the fault, RS have reasserted that they could find nothing wrong with the AVR. That stated, they have reiterated their willingness to replace product or provide a full refund. They have since agreed to replace the unit with an alternative product.

I am hopeful that RS will accept my most sincere apologies for my all too hasty judgement and any bad feeling I may have illustrated. Like I said, I actually feel somewhat embarrassed for starting the post in the first place (additionally so given the amount of times it has been viewed). Given my experience, I would not hesitate in using RS in the future, and indeed plan to.

Sincere thanks to RS for their understanding!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Well, Richer Sounds make a point of talking up their customer service, and the fact that the boss still takes a very personal interest in the day to day minutiae of the company, down to personally reading all completed customer feedback forms which are given out at every sale. I would be very surprised if you did not get a nice letter back from him offering you a replacement unit and apologising for the inconvenience.

 

[Anonymous]

Melon123,You will be safe as you have rights. ( keep copies of all correspondence)

First write one more letter to Richer sounds stating your problem and that it is a follow up to the previous letter. Send recorded delivery which must be signed for.

Tell him in the letter that your equipment does not work the way it should and therefore you are stating that it does not come up to the standard of the sales of goods act 1979 iand that you are contacting trading standards

Meanwhile contact trading standards and they will take your case up.

When you buy anything from new it has got to work the way the manufacture lays out. If not you are entitled to a full refund if a fix can not be found to your satisfaction under the sales of goods act 1979. This can be done anytime within six months of purchase

 

[Anonymous]

Many, Many thanks for the advice IDC.

Can't thank you enough!!!!!!

Will do as suggest

 

[cram]

Whilst clearly the Op hasn't received great service from Richer Sounds they are well within their rights to repair rather than replace. That element is not at the customers discretion it's at the companies. I don't see that Richer Sounds have yet done anything that warrants Trading Standards getting on to them. By all means keep pushing for a replacement or a refund just remember that neither Richer Sounds or the manufacturer are obligated to provide these options. They are however, obligated to fix the item.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes I understand that but I had only had the item for 5 weeks, Surely the product can be described as having an "inherent fault" and should therefore be replaced. My concern is that if the item has proved faulty, due to a poor manufacturing process, who is to say that additional faults won't appear further down the line. The result being that the item is backwards and forwards to RS for longer than I have use of it. It seems unreasonable to provide a repaired product after just 5 weeks.

If I had deciphred the product manual a week earlier (instead of using just stereo or 5.1 surround modes which are fine) the item would have been replaced (according to RS's website). I don't see how RS can establish that the item was ever in full working order.

 

[Anonymous]

Now from what I remember the Sale of Goods act says that if the product is faulty within a "reasonable period of time" then the customer is entitled to a replacement or refund. This period of time is not defined in the law, and is usually set by a company to 28 days/1 month. So from what I can tell RS haven't technically done anything wrong. The 6 months thing that a previous poster mentioned is not the period in which you are entitled to your money back. That is the period where the retailer is responsible for proving the product is not faulty. After 6 months then the retailed can ask the customer to prove that it is. I think. There are plenty of reputable websites (government sites etc) that tell you exactly what your rights are. I'd suggest reading one as the Sales of Goods Act is so commonly misunderstood.

You might be able to dispute the "reasonable period of time" but it's probably a long and difficult process that I've never heard of anyone completing successfuly. Best bet is to, as somebody already said, send another letter recorded delivery to make sure it gets there and await a reply. I wouldn't go throwing around the Sale of Goods act though because I don't think you've got that much weight behind your argument in that sense.

 

[cram]

Melon123:
Yes I understand that but I had only had the item for 5 weeks, Surely the product can be described as having an "inherent fault" and should therefore be replaced. My concern is that if the item has proved faulty, due to a poor manufacturing process, who is to say that additional faults won't appear further down the line. The result being that the item is backwards and forwards to RS for longer than I have use of it. It seems unreasonable to provide a repaired product after just 5 weeks.

If I had deciphred the product manual a week earlier (instead of using just stereo or 5.1 surround modes which are fine) the item would have been replaced (according to RS's website). I don't see how RS can establish that the item was ever in full working order.

'fraid that doesn't change anything. Yes you may get other faults down the line after a repair but there again you may not. I can understand your frustation and understand why you would prefer a replacement (I probably would as well). However, you don't have a consumer right to an automatic replacement. Personally I would be inclined to play on the poor service by the shop angle and hope for the best. Wading in with trading standards at this point is unlikely to get you where you want be.

 

[Anonymous]

I think I understand that but aren't RS obliged to supply me with a fully working product in the first place? When I purchased the product, I did'nt purchase it 'as faulty' or I would have asked for a major discount. Since this discount was not supplied / nor was the item advertised as faulty, am I within my rights to demand what I originaly paid for. As stated ealier, is'nt it down to RS (rather than me) to illustrate the product was in full working order (in the first 6 months).

As stated in the original post I provided RS with a full description of the fault, they then neglected to test the product as per direction. They ultimately turned down the opputunity to visit my home where I could easily replicate the fault.

 

[cram]

You believed you had bought a fully working item from them, they believed they had sold a fully working item. I haven't read anything that makes it appear that RS were in anyway underhand in how they sold the item to you. If I understand your timeline correctly you didn't report a fault until a little over a month after purchase.

I don't think it is up to RS to prove the item was fully working when supplied to you. Likewise I don't think they are obliged to visit you in your home to assess the fault.

If I were you I would make sure you provide them (if you haven't already) with clear instructions on how to reproduce the fault. Maybe an idea to record the fault in someway so you can illustrate to them what you mean.

I'll repeat: I understand your frustation.

 

[Anonymous]

If you bought from their internet site you could use the Distance Selling Regulations (2000 act) to get it sorted out.

 

[Anonymous]

I think you need to ask to read there Reapir and Refund Policy, You have had the product for a month and it has only now produced this fault they do not have to refund the item for you or even replace but they will send it off for repair and this is you only option. It will not be back and forth it takes anything from 1 - 4 weeks and thats it.ÿ

And as for asking somone to come around to your house to check your item even if the store was empty or not they still have jobs to do and have to make money so dont moan about that.ÿ

 

[margetti]

Sorry I can't offer any practical advice - Sale of Good Act et al are a complete minefield. But I support your view that the item should be replaced - if not legally then as a function of good customer service (the return of a genuinely faulty product will not result in any cost to the retailer).

From personal experience, electrical products either fail within the first couple of months (due to a fault during the manufacturing process), or they last "forever" (ie within an acceptable number of years - if not decades).

 

[Anonymous]

I'm basing on what I wrote with a new car I bought that had a problem that both the garage and the manufacture would not fix to my satisfaction.

I was just inside the 6 month period and was lucky I contacted trading standards who explained the process to me. The dealership and car were Audi.

It's ok given advice out from a company prospective. However I am giving it out from an unsatisfied consumer which clearly Melon123 is. He has made contact with no communication coming forth from Richer sounds. If you want results after no communication has been made you have to be seen as serious.

Edit to add. It also covers electrical goods not just cars.

 

[cram]

I'm certainly not being an apologist for RS but that's not the current situation with the Op. The customer service people have asked him to bring it in for them to look at. So RS are asking for an opportunity to fix the fault but the Op would prefer a replacement/refund. The only thing I can see trading standards saying at this point is take the amp in to RS.

 

[Anonymous]

NickD2544:

It will not be back and forth it takes anything from 1 - 4 weeks and thats it.

If the fault was down to a fault in the manufacturing process my concern is that this same process might produce other faults after time. I would therfore have to go through the same process again. As margetti advised, products either fail in the first couple of months (dud) or they last for ever

NickD2544:

And as for asking somone to come around to your house to check your item even if the store was empty or not they still have jobs to do and have to make money so dont moan about that.

I asked them to come to my house as a matter of last resort. If they had bothered to test the product correctly (as advised from my experience of replicating the fault), I would'nt have needed to ask them.

Let me reiterate, my motivation for buying from RS in the first place was because of an anticipated level of customer service. A job I believe they do get paid for! If the staff had in fact listened to me rather than being totally dismissive my complaint may well have been with denon. As earlier stated, a replacement costs RS nothing! I would also add that, when I explained the fault in full, both denon and one of their servicing companies suggested that I seek a replacement.

I'm actually at a loss as to why I feel I have to defend myself

 

[Anonymous]

My point is that I should'nt have had to speak to Denon et al in the first place!

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, it would cost RS to replace rather than repair. Denon will pay for any repairs needed during the first 12 months, but will not simply swap the unit for a new one, so the cost of replacement would have to be borne by RS who would then have to get the original repaired and sell that at a loss as 'graded'. The law states that RS can at their choice repair or replace, though if a repair was unsuccessful then the OP would be entitled to a refund. This is a good example of how patchy RS aftersales can be, though I don't see how a strongly worded letter to Head Office wouldn't solve this all very quickly. Trading standards would only advise and not intervene at this early stage.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm certainly not being an apologist for RS but that's not the current situation with the Op. The customer service people have asked him to bring it in for them to look at. So RS are asking for an opportunity to fix the fault but the Op would prefer a replacement/refund. The only thing I can see trading standards saying at this point is take the amp in to RS.

Sorry cram I did not pick up on that earlier. Yes you're right. If Richer Sounds are willing to have a look to fix the problem then you can't go along to trading standards. I was under the impression no contact had been made.

 

[Anonymous]

The stated facts are from reading the thread...

The product was returned with complaint after 1 mth.

It was tested by the retailer and found to be OK on test in the store.

The customer was directed to contact the manufacturer

The manufacturer directed you back to the retailer

The company has so far not responded to your letter of complaint to the CEO.

As far as I understand the law, you have to give the retailer the full opportunity to find and fix the fault. With it being (it seems) of a not clear nature so not obvious to the store on testing it should be insisted by yourself to be returned to Denon by the retailer for thorough evaluation.

Under the Sales of Goods Act it is you that should insist that the goods are not fit for purpose and reject them.
There is a clear distinction between goods developing a fault that should be repaired under guarantee and those not fit for purpose.
You must be clear as to what you relying on in making the complaint.
A good retailer would give you guidance on a product supplied that is perceived faulty, and would return it to the manufacturer along with notes of the customers complaints.

After all unless they are an authorised service agent of them how are they to have the expertise to fault find?

That is the point I would pursue.

 

[rajeeboy]

Hi

Its quite complicated to explain but in effect the retailer does have a reasonable opportunity to repair the defective product.

The relevant law is The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 which made some amendments to the Sale of Goods Act.

The importantt hings to remember are that if they (the retailer) cannot estabish what the problem is, within the first six months the burden is on them to show that the product is not faulty. Don't get fobbed off by the retailer telling you that you should speak to the manufacturers. Your contract is with the retailer. If all else fails, there is a very cheap procedure under the small claims procedure in a County Court which will cost you virtually nothing and can be concluded very quickly as long as the product you have bought is under £5000 which I expect it is.

I hope this of some help

 

[Anonymous]

I think you just need to take it back to your local RS and get them to send it off for repair ask for a replacement unit if you need somthing to get you by while its away and then if they still cant find a problem take matters further, but untill you do so all this small clames courts and trading standers is a bit silly you still as you have not given them the chance to look at it fully.ÿ

 

[Alec]

"Your contract is with the retailer."

Can't be said often enough.

And, tho I know its annoying,some companies will be ignorant of the law or will "try it on". However, there are thinga they have to do and things they do not. And what they have to do in law is often nothing compared to what you consider to be good customer service.

I'm afraid i would just take a deap breath and accept that, while continuing to press the matter wit RS before getting trading standards/CAB or such involved.

 

[rob_981]

Melon123, I read through your letter, and I was just wondering if the product is actually faulty. With some tv programs and dvds, when playing them with surround sound, the sound coming out of the rears does sound garbled. It's very quiet however, and you have to go right up to the speaker to hear it. It doesn't happen with cds though. And if the dvd has a 5.1 soundtrack, it shouldn't happen with it either.

I think it has to do with the quality of the sound recording on the actual program. If there is nothing to play, I think the amp will try to create something to give the impression of surround sound, and it does sound a bit garbled. But as I said, it's always very quiet. I've never heard it from the fronts though, although I've never actually listened for it.

Is the garbled sound loud enough to hear easily?

 

[Andrew Everard]

Yes, it can happen through the fronts as well. It's to do with the way the surround processing works with stereo material - it reacts to both amplitude and phase, and can thus be confused if the source material is at a low level, or has phase anomalies in it.

This could happen equally with TV programmes and some CDs - they're not really meant to be processed into surround by PLII, Neo:6 or similar proprietary systems, so may have elements in them likely to upset such processing.

I'm rather surprised that nobody at Richer Sounds or Denon knew enough to flag this up to the original poster as a possible cause.