Knowing the rights you don’t have can often be as important as knowing the ones you do have. Or, at the very least, it can save you time and effort and stop you fighting losing battles while your blood pressure goes through the roof.
In the space of two days recently two stories readers shared neatly illustrated that point. First up was a person we shall call Margo who was not happy at all with the manner she had been treated in a shop.
Margo begins her mail be describing herself as “a regular shopper at a well known supermarket who spends circa €200 to €250 per week on groceries. I would consider myself a valued customer.”
Before heading off on holidays in June she bought a navy and white striped jumper at this supermarket, which she does not name.
‘I feel Irish Rail are just running down the time and hoping I will go away’
‘It’s been 120 days and counting and Aer Lingus still hasn’t refunded me $1,953 for my cancelled flight’
‘I ordered an iPhone off Refurbed for over €700 and have experienced an endless stream of problems’
Here are 33 places to eat in Ireland that readers say are good value
The ‘young guy at the checkout’ then asked his manager if he should give Margo back her 30 quid and the manager said no
“I did not wash the jumper on holiday but when I returned home I washed it at 40 degrees in my usual wash as I don’t wash anything above 40 degrees. When I took the jumper out of the machine not only had it lost its texture but the navy colour had run into the white part of the jumper making it unwearable.”
“As I am a loyal customer with this supermarket and having wasted €30 euro on the jumper which I really liked I went back at the end of June to speak with the manager and to get a refund which, based on my basic knowledge of consumer rights, I was entitled to,” Margo writes.
She spoke with a “young guy at the drapery checkout and he said he would get the manager”.
It was at this point that things started to go off the rails.
“Expecting a refund I was instead asked for my name, phone number and the jumper – which was placed in a bag. I was told they would need to contact the manufacturer,” Margo says.
“He said it may be a re-call issue and that the manufacturer would have to go back through their records to check out details related to the product.”
Margo tells us that she “found this all a bit odd” and said to the manager that her contract was with the retailer and not the manufacturer and therefore she “should be offered my refund and it was for retailer to take it up with the manufacturer if they wished.”
The “young guy at the checkout” then asked his manager if he should give Margo back her 30 quid and the manager said no and repeated that he “would need to liaise with their manufacturer.”
[ What Irish consumers need to know about their rightsOpens in new window ]
Margo was told she would receive a call the next day with the outcome of this review of manufacturer records.
She was “pretty busy” the following day when the call came but it was brief as the only update the manager had was that the manufacturer was still reviewing their records in relation to care instructions for the jumper and that they hadn’t got a response to give for her yet.
“I was told I would be contacted again later that day or the next to let me know if I would be getting a refund. To say I found all this odd would be a major understatement. I also have no interest or concern for manufacturer information and simply want a refund or replacement for my product that can no longer be worn. I was slightly confused as to why I was being phoned to give me an update on a manufacturer review when it’s really nothing to do with me, surely that’s a matter between the retailer and the manufacturer.”
The promised call never came so a few days later she dropped into the store and met with the same manager and asked him what the story was with her refund.
“I was told that the manufacturer was still checking their records and that they were checking if the product had been washed at 40 degrees. I asked him if he was questioning my report that I had indeed washed the jumper at 40 degrees and he denied this. I told him I was confused as to why he was giving me updates on the manufacturer and that I simply wanted my money back,” Margo says.
“He said he would need to phone me on Monday with another update. I told him I wanted the jumper back and that he could phone me with the update. He proceeded to pull out his phone and wanted to take a picture of my name and phone number on his phone which I was not happy with and instead asked him to take the paper copy of my contact details. Again I was left bemused by this response.”
The bottom line here is that the expectation of an immediate refund was misplaced – although many retailers will simply give it
A few days later Margo contacted us “wondering why I was not offered a refund or replacement, the jumper is current stock. I am wondering why I am receiving updates on manufacturer reviews? I’m a little too busy for this extended response from this well-known retailer.”
We appreciate the frustration Margo feels at having lost a jumper she liked and the runaround she believes she has been given by the shop. We also reckon the retailer might have been better advised to simply give her a replacement jumper – although if the batch is, in fact, faulty then the same problem could arise when she next washes it.
Having said that, the shop is not in breach of any laws and is clearly following what it believes to be the correct steps.
Under consumer law, when you buy a product you have the right to expect it to be of an acceptable standard, fit for its intended purpose and as advertised.
Now, clearly this stripy jumper was none of these things so that means Margo is entitled to either a repair, a replacement or a refund.
But here’s the thing. She cannot expect the retailer to automatically provide a refund or even a replacement and, generally speaking, she has no right to one.
It is the retailer who gets to choose which of the three Rs gets offered first. And more often than not their first choice is a repair. They do not have to give you a replacement product while yours is in for repair either and they are entitled to investigate the cause of the issue before deciding on any course of action.
In this case the jumper is clearly beyond repair and a replacement doesn’t arise either which takes us to the next piece of the puzzle – the role of the manufacturer.
While Margo is right to say her contract is with the store and not with the manufacturer of her jumper, the manager was right to say that to have it properly assessed it would have to be sent back to them for the very simple reason that he or she is unlikely to have the technical qualifications to assess the nature of the problem.
The bottom line here is that the expectation of an immediate refund was misplaced – although many retailers will simply give it. On two occasions Margo mentions her loyalty to the shop and says she would have expected to have been rewarded for that. We couldn’t agree more but we feat that expectation is out of sync with the cold hard realities of our commercial world.
As an aside we were amazed the manager was promising to send the jumper back to the manufacture, have it assessed and get the results back to Margo within 24 hours – that seems optimistic at best.
Warranties are often offered by manufacturers but statutory rights trump them every time
Less than 24 hours later we heard from Nikki who believed she was also being given the runaround.
She bought an Apple Watch in October 2020 and it came with a two-year warranty. Just before that warranty was due to expire, her watch broke and Apple was as good as its word and replaced it at no cost.
So far so good.
Fast forward to last month when the replacement watch “went haywire. It started ringing 911 nonstop and then died,” Nikki writes. “Apple are now stating that a brand new watch is only covered for 90 days as it’s a replacement. Is this correct?”
Things can be confusing when it comes to warranties, guarantees, extended warranties, multiple pieces of legislation going back generations and a certain degree of misunderstanding at retailer, manufacturer – and indeed consumer – level.
[ What are my rights if I want to cancel my holiday because of the heat?Opens in new window ]
The bad news for Nikki is that Apple is not breaking any consumer laws. The good news is that Nikki probably has more protection than she thinks if things go wrong with the new watch.
If you buy a product that has a two year warranty and it breaks after 23 months and is replaced with a brand new product, more often than not the warranty on the new product will either not be given or will last only for whatever time is left on the original warranty.
The bottom line is Nikki should not get overly hung up on the word warranty. In very simple terms, a warranty is a promise from the manufacturer that they will repair or replace an item you bought if something goes wrong for a set period of time after you bought it. It is there to give you additional protection and strengthens your consumer rights to a repair, replacement or refund.
It does not, however, replace your statutory rights and instead operates in parallel with them. That means that if a warranty has expired or is not covered under the warranty, a consumer can still pursue a remedy under their statutory rights.
Statutory rights are a legal guarantee allowing consumers to seek redress if an item is faulty regardless of whether or not a manufacturer has offered a warranty.
Warranties are often offered by manufacturers but statutory rights trump them every time. Under the Sale of Goods Act, consumers have up to six years to seek redress for faulty or defective items.
There are limits to this law, however. And the limits are typically governed by how much you pay for something, what it is supposed to do and what you do with it.
A digital watch that costs €10 is probably not going to last long, so if it breaks after a year you have no real comeback. An Apple Watch, however, should last quite a bit longer.
A quick guide to the consumer rights you do and don’t have ...
Pricing: If the shelf price is cheaper than the price at the till, you don’t have the right to buy the product at the lower price. The price on the shelf is an “invitation to treat” and no contract is in place until money changes hands. Even if money does change hands you may still lose out.
If you bought a pair of swanky runners online for a tenner even though they normally cost €200 and your credit card was deducted, the sale can still be cancelled if the retailed cops the mistake before dispatching the product on the grounds that the contract is null and void because it was based on erroneous information.
Returns: Many good shops have generous returns policies and allow you to exchange goods within a set time frame if you have changed your mind. Sometimes they will give you a credit note, sometimes they will give you your cash back. They are under absolutely no legal obligation to do either.
If you are returning something bought because it is in some way flawed you do not need a store receipt only proof of purchase. That can take many forms, including credit card receipts.
If a fault materialises within six months of a product being bought, the fault is presumed to have existed at the time of purchase you are not legally obliged to provide proof of the defect. After six months the burden of proof switches and the consumer can be asked to prove any fault did not arise as a result of misuse.
Digital protections: Last year the Consumer Rights Act became law giving people the same rights and protections over digital content and digital services, such as streaming, downloads, cloud products, as they do currently with a physical products or services.
Also among the enhanced digital protections is the right to a full refund, exchange or repair when goods or services are not as described or not fit for purpose.
People are also entitled to any upgrades to the product or service that are required to ensure the goods continue to work as expected and agreed, free of charge.
Faulty goods: As well as having the right to a refund, a replacement or a repair when a product is flawed, the new law gives people the right to agree a price reduction on faulty goods and they will be entitled to withhold payment for goods partially paid for if they are not satisfied with the quality of the item received.
The law also stops companies using certain terms and conditions which are “automatically regarded as unfair when put in a contract”.
Any condition which allows a trader unilaterally change the terms of a contract, or any provision which would indemnify a trader from harm caused by a product or service is not allowed.
Businesses also have to set out clearly a description of the goods or services being provided, the total price and the cost of delivery before entering into a contract with a consumer.
Sales: New pricing indication regulations mean that if a retailer has a sale, they will have to clearly display the previous price and that will have to be the lowest price the product was priced at over the last 30 days before it went into sale. In times past, a retailer could have increased the price just before it went on sale or used the Recommended Retail Price from 12 months previously when boasting about a discount.
