Litigate or shame?

[TiggerToo]

Hypothetical scenario:

One purchases a moderately expensive bit of kit for boat. Let's say £10K. This is from a reputable and well-respected company. The kit comes with a 2 year warranty. Said bit of kit fails badly on cruise 1 year and 4 months after installation.

Company quibbles about warranty, and offers to supply part of the failed pieces.

What would you do to seek redress?

Tell the company you will write up a factual in the usual boating outlets?
Sue? How (small claims, solicitors,....)?

 

[Clancy Moped]

How easy is the part to replace by a none professional (ie yourself) and would it negate the warranty because you have done it?

 

[Bouba]

There was a similar thread about a dodgy catamaran…bought by a YouTube blogger…the sad fact is that most big companies couldn’t care less..especially if this piece of kit was installed by a third party…it doesn’t matter if the installer is recommended by the manufacturer and even if you got their name from the manufacturer’s website…they will use the installer’s independent status as a get out of jail card…in fact the offer of new parts is pretty good in my experience…anyhow the one exception that will have the manufacturer doing all it can to help…is if the vlogger has big tits

 

[chris-s]

I would also meant to understand why it failed, I think that is pretty important for a piece of kit that valuable. What are the chances of it failing again that soon? Does more need to be done to perform a proper repair to prevent failure again?

 

[Poecheng]

I think it is difficult dilemma
1. If you send it back to them, will you get it back in reasonable time and properly repaired or will it get 'lost'
2. If you accept the parts then I think it will be seen as you accepting that as fulfilment of the warranty, otherwise I think getting parts, getting it repaired locally (if possible) and then Small-Claim 'em for the labour costs would be the preferable option because of the issue with (1). However, accepting the parts will, I think be seen as full and final.

I think it depends on the company. Are they here to stay or are they a one-product outlet just doing well at the moment. If the former then check the terms of the warranty and, if it is parts and labour, then keep them to it. Do everything by email, keep notes, receipts everything.
Threatening exposure should be the very last option and only once the relationship is kaput

 

[dunedin]

…..
Company quibbles about warranty, and offers to supply part of the failed pieces.
….

What do you mean by “PART of the failed pieces”? Are they not replacing all the affected parts?

Need to check the terms of the warranty to see what entitled to. If your car breaks down under warranty they generally replace the parts not the full car, so replacing the parts here could be a reasonable response?
Are you still in the country where the item was supplied, and hence can the selling agent fit the parts?

 

[bedouin]

Hard to say without more information. Warranties are not unconditional - an offer to supply replacement parts FOC will in certain circumstances be reasonable if it is normal practice to repair the failure rather than replace and that can be done without great expense.

BTW whatever you do don't go through the courts - that is almost always an unpleasant experience with no guarantee of a satisfactory conclusion.

 

[Poignard]

Write a letter, to be sent recorded delivery to the supplier.

Begin by setting out the history of the transaction (invoice details, dates, guarantee offered, etc).

Next give details of what has gone wrong, ie what you are complaining about.

Conclude by stating what you want done to put things right, and by what date you want it done.

No abuse, no threats, no emotive language.

Send it off and await developments.

If nothing happens within a reasonable time, or you aren't happy with the response, decide on your next move.

 

[ylop]

Bought in the U.K.? (Scotland or elsewhere?
Are you trying to claim from retailer or manufacturer?
Have they suggested misuse? Are you sure it is not?
What is cost of repair?

What remedy are you looking for? No point going to court if you want them to fix it (almost impossible to force someone to do a repair), no point shaming them if you want cash - the damage will be done!

 

[ProDave]

Did you pay by credit card?

 

[steveeasy]

Although we dont know what piece of kit you bought for moderately expensive £10,000 16 months ago, Id think it a bit strange they offered some of the parts that failed. Id read from that they are not accepting the kit failed due to a failure of a key component. Normally a failure is caused by a single component which may lead to damaging other components. If an engine failed due to a none wearing component, you would look for the engine to be repaired fully by the supplier.

Are you happy with the moderately expensive bit of kit? if yes, then youd be happy with the failed parts being supplied to rectify the kit. If you think it has failed due to not being of satisfactory standard. then you need to get expert opinion. with that go back to them. No point actively trying to publish the failure as this will not lead to the desired outcome and potentially you could find yourself being sued.

The warranty should make clear what it covers. if it does not then ask for clarity. If they do not provide you with clarity and try to hide behind a mist then this is a breach of the 2015 consumer rights act and would stand you in a stronger position.

£10,000 is not really a moderate amount of money. I think a piece of kit to that value should not fail in that timescale. If it was a mast or rigging how it failed, what part that lead to the failure, and the conditions at time all are very relevant.

With no detail at all its hard for anyone to really say what the best strategy would be.

Steveeasy

 

[dunedin]

Did you pay by credit card?

Suspect would struggle to get a refund on an item via credit card scheme after 16 months. That is into the realms of the supplier warranty rather than rejection of purchase, I would imaging

 

[ylop]

Suspect would struggle to get a refund on an item via credit card scheme after 16 months. That is into the realms of the supplier warranty rather than rejection of purchase, I would imaging

Same rules apply as to the original retailer. It will be the OPs burden to show the defect that caused the failure was present at the time of purchase which is not always easy.

 

[dunedin]

Same rules apply as to the original retailer. It will be the OPs burden to show the defect that caused the failure was present at the time of purchase which is not always easy.

Yes it looks like after 6 months the OP would, as you say, need to “prove” the defect was there on purchase - https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange/#must

 

[MontyMariner]

It all depends on the words in the warranty. Replacement / Repair . . . Parts / Labour . . .

 

[Tranona]

Hypothetical scenario:

One purchases a moderately expensive bit of kit for boat. Let's say £10K. This is from a reputable and well-respected company. The kit comes with a 2 year warranty. Said bit of kit fails badly on cruise 1 year and 4 months after installation.

Company quibbles about warranty, and offers to supply part of the failed pieces.

What would you do to seek redress?

Tell the company you will write up a factual in the usual boating outlets?
Sue? How (small claims, solicitors,....)?

Is this hypothetical? as it seems from what you say to be real

Would this be the new engine you had installed by any chance?

If so and you bought it from the installer then your claim is with the installer not the manufacturer. He of course will try to recover costs of the repairs from the manufacturer under the 2 year warranty. However, the Consumer Rights act overrides the warranty. That is usually conditional and limited. While the act gives you a wider range of rights than is normally covered in a manufacturers warranty, actually using those rights is not easy.

As already pointed out after this length of time it is for you to prove that the defects were there at the beginning and either the product was not of merchantable quality or fit for purpose. Are you suggesting that they have agreed to replace some parts and not others which you think they should? If so this is not uncommon and you should ask for a detailed explanation as to why they are not replacing all the parts. If you do not accept the explanation then you will have to challenge it, which will almost certainly require an "expert" opinion. You may be able to use such an opinion to persuade them to change their mind - but a word of warning - they are experts, not only in their product but also in handling such claims, plus they are aware of their reputation.

If you want to take it further then the small claims system is appropriate, but don't go there unless you have a knockout case and only after making every effort to resolve the issue for example by suggesting arbitration. Whatever happens it is only worth doing if the sums involved justify the amount of effort you will have to put in even through the simple route. Just to give you an example I had a dispute with an engine manufacturer for a failure that was not covered by their 5 year warranty. They knew that the component often fails like this one in 3 years or even less, which is why it is excluded from the warranty. However the nature of the failure is a product of the manufacturing process. To take them on under the CRA would have required an independent opinion as I am not technically qualified and while I believe I would have won with an independent opinion it was only £350 and not worth the hassle.

BTW naming and shaming is not a wise course of action. As you might have seen from similar threads here there is always two sides to a story and the namer and shamer will inevitably favour theirs. Can never understand what they hope to achieve - by all means ask for advice but to get sound advice, or even informed opinion you have to give both sides of the story (and maybe not imply it is a hypothetical question when maybe it is not!)

 

[fisherman]

Two year warranty may be worthless. If you go to SC, six months after purchase it's up to you to prove the item was faulty at sale, before 6 months the vendor must prove it wasn't.

On the other hand some items that might be expected to last many years can carry a notional 6 year warranty. Obs not a £3.99 asda kettle......
I claimed for a two year old freezer and got 75%, even though there was only the statutary one year.

 

[xyachtdave]

Can we guess who please?!

Navigation/electronics by a manufacturer with a name similar to a large DIY chain would be my suggestion.

 

[fisherman]

I'm not sure thet the defects had to be present at purchase per se. If a component fails after two years was it always faulty or is it bad luck, shit happens?
In my case I had to get an expert report on the freezer. Litigate or shame? Appeal to better nature first and give every opportunity for redress, then litigate, for me. There's too much media shaming, devalued.
Quote

What rights do I have under statute?​

Even if you do not have a warranty over goods which you have purchased, you still have statutory rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015).
If goods bought from a retailer aren’t of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described, you have the right to return them and get a full refund within 30 days of purchase.
Within six months of purchase, it’s up to the retailer to prove that you caused the problem with the goods: if they can’t, they’ll have to repair or replace the goods or give you a refund if that’s not possible.
After this initial six-month period, you will have to prove that any faults are not down to misuse of the product or general wear and tear. This might require you to obtain an expert report, opinion or evidence of similar problems across the product range. Factors such as the price, the specification/model of the goods, the length of time you’ve had the goods and the length of time which they should last will all be considerations.
If all else fails, you have six years from when you bought the faulty goods to take a claim to the small claims court and reclaim the cost of repair of the product.

 

[steveeasy]

It is totally hypothetical from our prospective though as we don’t know in the slightest what failed. From what type of trader and if a warranty contract was in place.

Other than that it’s simple. B&G replaced my Vulcan that went up in smoke after 18 months because as they said all products at the time sold in the EU carrried a min 2 year warranty.
In this case if there is a warranty that covers the failed parts your on to a winner , if it doesn’t your not.
Steveeasy