Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
What do you think of Elon Musk? Have your say | No thanks
View Threaded
Tue 16 Jul 2019 18:58
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - skidpan

Not motoring related but the above are pretty much the same whatever you buy.

Bought a new watch 29 December 2018, Tissot Powermatic 80, £361 in the sale. Well respected seller with a well known web site but they do have a few branches one of which is only about 15 miles away thus I collected on 03 January 2019.

All was well until late April when the watch stopped several times whilst wearing it due to the crown (the winder in non technical speak) coming out 2 positions. Returned watch which was repaired? and posted back to me 2 weeks later.

Early June exactly the same thing happened again and since I was within the magic 6 month period I returned the watch with a letter (pro forma from Which) rejecting it.

After a week or so I rang to check progress to be told that they do not have to comply with the CRA and that they never give refunds on items that have been used. Asked to speak to a manager but no one available. Rang again next day and the person I spoke to told me that was not correct but they still cannot gives refunds after 30 days unless the manufacturer says they can, supposedly they would loose the franchise. He was insistent that the CRA allows this. Watch being repaired, no option for refund.

Unhappy so I downloaded a form from Barclaycard and sent it in asking for help under the CCA section 75. They rang a few days later to say they had received the form but could not help since they had no liability and do not refund money to unhappy customers. Explained the situation and the person still said they could not help.

Then I rang Consumer Advice and for the first time I spoke to someone who clearly knew the law. Confirmed that both the jeweller and Barclaycard were incorrect and that I was entitled to a full refund under CRA 2015 and that Barclaycard were jointly liable under Section 75. Gave me some useful info about how to proceed next.

A couple of days later Barclaycard wrote to me and asked me to call them which I did. This time the chap admitted that they did have joint liability but I would need to prove that the watch was faulty. To do that I would need to get the watch back and have an independent assessment carried out which Barclaycard would pay for. But I saw a possible problem immediately, by asking for the watch back would I be risking my rights under the CCA legislation. The man at Barclaycard said I would but it would have to be my decision. He tried to explain that there is a conflict between the CCA and CRA which can cause issues (but I have found no evidence of this on the web).

Sat on it for a few days and rang the jeweller again to be told that the manager was out and would ring back. He did, a week later. Good news, the watch was faulty (no surprise there) and because of this I could have a full refund, money back on card account with 2 days.

So a good outcome for me but in reality how on earth do people who buy a rubbish car from a back street garage actually get there money back. Or for that matter does anyone actually get their money back even if they buy from a reputable garage.

It seems to me based on experience that retailers will try and avoid complying with the law hoping customers will simply put up and shut up. As for Barclaycard, a total waste of space, still considering contacting the Financial Ombudsman to make them aware,

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 16 Jul 2019 20:00
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - Big John

I have had two good outcomes using section 75.

  • One a few years ago when I'd ordered and paid for a new sofa and Chair and when the company went bust I got a fairly quick refund.
  • The second - In January this year a holiday company I had booked a trip away with went bust - I had paid the deposit by credit card and the balance by other means - I eventually got paid out but it took a while an I had to email/scan loads of documents.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 17 Jul 2019 00:54
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - Avant

The retailer hopes that in this sort of situation the customer will just give up - as far too many British do, "not liking to make a fuss".

All credit to Skidpan for sticking to his guns. If anything I'd expect that this sort of thing happens more often with cars than with other goods, becaise more money is at stake.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 17 Jul 2019 09:03
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - craig-pd130

Very interesting and useful, thanks for that.

As you say, persistence pays (eventually) for those of us that can navigate these things, but it angers me that less worldly people like my elderly mum can get fobbed off by companies trying on such deliberate and blatant lying about their responsibilities.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 17 Jul 2019 09:14
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - craig-pd130

Other such lies told by retailers:

We don't give refunds

This has no basis in law. If a product is not of satisfactory quality or fit for purpose (such as a watch that repeatedly stops!) the customer is entitled to a refund. Notices or statements that 'we don't give refunds' are actually illegal.


We can't do anything without a receipt

A receipt is not a legal requirement for redress: a credit/debit card slip is accepted.

No refunds on items bought at a 'Sale' price

Items bought in a sale are still covered by consumer law: the customer is entitled to a refund or compensation EXCEPT if the item has an obvious defect that was pointed out at the time of sale (for example, if you buy an item like an ex-display TV that has a large scratch or chip on the casing which was pointed out at purchase, you can't later try and get a refund because of the scratch / chip. But if the same TV develops another fault, you can get redress.)

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 19 Jul 2019 15:12
Experience of CRA 2015 and Section 75 CCA - skidpan

Items bought in a sale are still covered by consumer law: the customer is entitled to a refund or compensation EXCEPT if the item has an obvious defect that was pointed out at the time of sale (for example, if you buy an item like an ex-display TV that has a large scratch or chip on the casing which was pointed out at purchase, you can't later try and get a refund because of the scratch / chip. But if the same TV develops another fault, you can get redress.)

2009 we bough a brand new Sony TV for Tesco in their sale. The model had recently been superseded but it had received tops reviews and at the price it was too good to miss. Add to that they gave us £100 PX for an old black and white set out of M & D's loft, no idea if it worked, they bought it in the 70's.

Move on 13 months and the TV died overnight, one evening it worked, the next morning totally dead. Contacted Tesco to ask what warranty there was on that TV and they told me (as I expected) it was 12 months. So I rang Sony to get the location of the nearest repair centre, by luck it was 200 yards form our office and I took it in the next day. 2 days later TV repaired, needed software reloading to remind the thing was a TV, cost £110, ouch.

Then received a letter from Tesco apologising for the problems but explaining that since we had bought the TV over 12 months previously they could not offer a replacement. What they did offer was to cover was a contribution to the repair costs if I sent them and official receipt for the work from a VAT registered repairer. Receipt in the post the next day and within a week received a cheque for £120, well happy.

That is how a company should react.

FYI 10 years on the and the TV is still working perfectly. Its in the bedroom now, we have a bigger Sony in the lounge but since our local Tesco no longer sell electrical goods it ca,me from Curry's (in their sale).

Reply | Report as offensive | Link