Advice re. lack of after sales support in relation to "expensive" item

[Sandy]

I installed the item early 2013, with the aim of this being ready to be used upon our departure from the UK late April 2013.
The item in question required commissioning. I spoke to the supplier, who said there was no point commissioning until we needed to use the item, so it was agreed he would attend to commission in late March/early April.

As an engineer and not knowing what the part is, need to ask why did you not commission it well before the departure date? Sod's Law always applys in situations like this. I know I am a nerdy engineer, but have the motto "test, test and test again", before puting any item into anything.

 

[Cardo]

I hope it's not a...

While it may be antediluvian, snail mail with recorded delivery cannot be denied and tends to focus the recipient's mind.

It is, and as with Sailorman, could I ask that you edit your post to remove the word, please?

For anyone else who wants to know, I'm happy to reply to PM's, but please don't post it to the thread.

Many thanks!

 

[Cardo]

As an engineer and not knowing what the part is, need to ask why did you not commission it well before the departure date? Sod's Law always applys in situations like this. I know I am a nerdy engineer, but have the motto "test, test and test again", before puting any item into anything.

The device in question requires putting into a "dormant" state if it's not to be used for a period of time. Had it been commissioned early, it would have required this treatment, which as I understand is best to be avoided if possible.

 

[Angele]

There are other models from other manufacturers that would also fit the bill.

Then I would be tempted to be very firm with them. I assume this is covered by the Sale of Goods Act. If so, then the goods must be "of merchantable quality"/"fit for purpose". Make sure you make reference to the Act and the phrases it uses, so they know you mean businees. Tell them that you are giving them a final chance to make the item work properly. If they cannot/will not fix it then, in accordance with your rights under the Act, you will reject the goods and demand reimbursement.

Unfortunately, because you didn't make the purchase with a credit card, this means relying on them to cough up. Before doing so, you will almost certainly need to send the item back to them, leaving you in a position where you have paid for the goods but they are no longer in your possession (although you almost certainly own them). Not a great position to be in. If they don't cough up then you need to be prepared to take them to court - using the process referred to in an earlier post.

The more forceful you are the more seriously they are likely to take you.

 

[Scarboroughsloop]

I shall be doing this in future.
As a side query -
The manufacturer has a website with contact details. Should I try contacting them direct to get this sorted? My concern is that this may undermine my position and could give the supplier an excuse to wash their hands of this and tell me to speak direct to the manufacturer in future?

Your contract was with the the supplier so I wouldn't worry about that. The supplier stated that 'the factory' would be in touch to collect so they must surely know about it anyway.......

 

[Neil_Y]

Definitely a sale of goods act dispute with the supplier, have a read through the various online versions, this one makes your options very clear http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/sale-of-goods-act

You will probably need an experts opinion of the fault or failure of the item as it's over a year from purchase, but that's probably worth the small expense to have an independent engineers report.

The interesting thing is the social media effects nowadays, they really impact on a products reputation for years to come.

Good luck let us know if you need any help, I know what it's like being away from UK trying to sort stuff.

 

[Resolution]

1. If you want to get a properly working bit of kit, then I suggest you concentrate on getting in verbal communication with your supplier. Remember that this is the busiest time of year for most equipment supplier/installers and they may have been tied up at the London Boat show, so they may have excuses for slow response times.

2. If you do decide to go legal and the Sale of Goods Act comes into play, just remember that a) you will have to prove to a court that the goods were faulty at the time of purchase, and that the fault is not due to subsequent mis-use. Also, b) under the SOG the supplier has the rights to try to repair the goods when first notified of the problem. If you have subsequently moved the goods to a different country that is your problem. He may quite reasonably ask you to return the goods to him for repair.

3. Check the supplier's T &Cs for express or implied warranties. These can be stronger than the SOG protection. Some have global warranties.

The legalistic approach is always tough on both sides. If you sail for pleasure as most of us do, think carefully what is best for you.

 

[longjohnsilver]

Why be concerned at naming the product, if the supplier/manufacturer does read this thread it might just jolt them into action? After all you do seem to have been more than reasonable in your actions and expectations.

Secondly, why such a long deadline, that's almost 2 months away, I'd be setting a 2 week time period to have it resolved, or a minimum of an agreeable action plan in place.

 

[pvb]

Why be concerned at naming the product, if the supplier/manufacturer does read this thread it might just jolt them into action? After all you do seem to have been more than reasonable in your actions and expectations.

Agreed, watermakers are fairly common bits of kit, why not just help other potential buyers by alerting them to bad service? In fact, why bother posting at all?

Edit: Just had a thought, it's not a Waterlog is it? Are people still falling for that scam?

 

[prv]

Agreed, XXXXXXXs are fairly common bits of kit,

Oooh, you'll be in trouble

Agreed, once Cardo mentioned the commissioning and the need for treatment and re-commissioning, the nature of the item becomes abundantly clear.

Seems clear enough to me - the thing clearly not of appropriate quality and/or not lasting a reasonable amount of time. Reject under Sale of Goods Act, in a summary letter setting out the whole case. If no satisfaction, send a "letter before action" saying that the next step is court (pretty sure £4k is under the Small Claims Track limit so risk to you is minimal), then if necessary follow through. Admittedly being abroad will complicate matters; I would always send such letters Recorded Delivery which I'm not sure if you can from where you are.

Pete

 

[Koeketiene]

Advice re. lack of after sales support in relation to "expensive" item

I'd rather not name names at this stage, so I'll try and make this reasonably generic. I am aware the supplier does on occasion read the forum.

And why not name names?
If your claim is valid, what have you got to hide?
The fact that the supplier reads the forum should make him come about pretty quickly.

Get in touch with them one last time. Tell them that unless they undertake steps to resolve the matter to your satisfaction by COB Friday week, you will name and shame them on here.
The sound you will hear is them backpeddeling.
As President Nixon's henchmen used to say: When you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds soon follow.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Agreed, xxxxxxx are fairly common bits of kit, why not just help other potential buyers by alerting them to bad service? In fact, why bother posting at all?

Edit: Just had a thought, it's not a xxxxxxxxx is it? Are people still falling for that scam?

A fine example of the forum at its worst. A fellow boaty asks for help in sorting out a problem. For whatever reason, he asks that the name is not mentioned. Sure enough, somebody has to come along and, rather than giving help, deliberately tries to make life difficult.

 

[jrudge]

This is a bit silly. So the op says it costs 4k, needs commissioning and hibernation if not used. So it is a water maker.

As someone in the market for same think more detail would help all. I assume he is dealing with a retailer and no doubt there are dozens, so keep that private if you wish, but if the brand is poor why not mention.

 

[dslittle]

As an engineer and not knowing what the part is, need to ask why did you not commission it well before the departure date? Sod's Law always applys in situations like this. I know I am a nerdy engineer, but have the motto "test, test and test again", before puting any item into anything.

I am in a similar position to Cardo with, what I think, is a similar piece of kit. In fact three similarly priced bits of kit. I deliberately obtained them 24 months before departure for exactly this reason - I am now 18 months from departure and still chasing up the Company as there have been substantial problems despite the 'reputable' Company telling me that they were VERY experienced with the products. The initial engineer has now 'left' the Company. I sought to have all the work done, and commissioned, by one Company so that they could be no suggestion that the problem was due to 'another's incompetence'. I only hope that everything is resolved before we leave...

 

[Sandy]

The device in question requires putting into a "dormant" state if it's not to be used for a period of time. Had it been commissioned early, it would have required this treatment, which as I understand is best to be avoided if possible.

Sounds like a pi$$ poor design then and should have been better engineered.

Hope you get it sorted.

 

[richardbayle]

So the op says it costs 4k, .

Only 4 k? I was robbed, but mine works

 

[Cardo]

As it's been mentioned by a couple of people, I might as well confirm it is a watermaker. Though I'll try and keep the brand and supplier anonymous for now.

Sounds like a pi$$ poor design then and should have been better engineered.

Hope you get it sorted.

Unfortunately, I think it's a limitation of the general watermaker concept. I'm not aware of any brand that doesn't require pickling if it's to be left dormant. Though I do know someone who has a fairly hefty unit and has never pickled it over winter and has continued to work great. So it seems YMMV.

Thanks for all the advice, everyone. I'll try and avoid threatening any legal action at this time and see if the supplier does get this sorted. He has been given a date and he has stated he will have it sorted well before then. So I feel I should give him the opportunity to sort it.

I've received a few PM's from people who are aware of who the supplier is and it sounds like good after sales support is something that is important to them, so hopefully this situation will be rectified soon.

 

[pvb]

A fine example of the forum at its worst. A fellow boaty asks for help in sorting out a problem. For whatever reason, he asks that the name is not mentioned. Sure enough, somebody has to come along and, rather than giving help, deliberately tries to make life difficult.

Surely posting a question without being prepared to name the brand of the product, or even what sort of product it is, counts as the best example of the forum at its worst?
.

 

[Jim@sea]

I would consider getting a solicitor to put them on notice that you want to return the unit and get a full refund.
It is obviously "Not fit for the purpose"
I had to do this 25 years ago when I had bought a "New" boat which had been wrongly described. (and I got a full refund) And since then the law is more favourable to consumers.

 

[BruceDanforth]

It is a watermaker. You will be forever bypassing obscure non useful sensors that it doesn't really need. 'Tis the nature of the beast...