Dapol Returns - keep your receipt!

[Black Sheep]

Just a quick note,

 

I currently work in a model shop and am an N gauge modeler and thought I'd share information we are passing onto our customers when purchasing new Dapol locomotives.

 

Basically, our shop have been told by Dapol that they are going to be only dealing with warranty issues if the locomotive is sent in with a copy of the purchase receipt (guessing that's to show when it was bought and that the shop sending it in is where it was bought from)

 

I'm keeping my receipts for both my farish and my Dapol locos tucked in the box with them just incase.

[smg201]

I am not a Lawyer, nor an N gauge modeller. But i would like to point readers to the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (http://www.legislati...k/ukpga/1979/54) where by you only ever need proof of purchase (receipt or bank statement or original packaging or a witness) to entitle you to your consumer rights being recognised. This includes when buying your item should be satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. If these are not met, you are entitled (with your proof of purchase) a repair, replacement or refund for upto 6 years (though this is a little where the "upto" ends). This supersedes any European law of 2 years and manufacturer warranties/guarantees. We actually have some of the best consumer rights in the world, sadly going through European parliaments currently is an attempt to limit our rights inline with European Law, so please use the Sales of Goods Act 1979 whilst we still have it!

 

I thought i would just pass this information on as i am shocked by how many people do not know their rights. I recently had a missing buffer on a DVT and used the Sales of Goods act very effectively to get a replacement when initially the manafactorer refused liability.

 

**unfair line removed**

 

I hope my information help, but be warned i am not a Lawyer, thus please read the acts link above. I am just a customer who doesnt like business to get away with faults when it is there fault.

[mjkerr]

I agree, note that in Scotland the time limit is 5 years

I had a dispute with a retailer and they wanted the receipt after the item failed at 4 years and 10 months old

I sent them a copy, keeping the original, and they disputed it as an invalid receipt not issued by them

The matter went to Small Claims Court process and the court awarded in my favour, the sherrif just laughed asking why the retailer refused such a receipt when it was clearly issued by them

The company put that the claim was not supported by a receipt, and the sherrif advised it made no difference although I was able to prove the purchase from the receipt

 

As above, consumer rights

 

Equally, I can understand Dapols position in this, as second hand models (under 6 years old) can change hands very quickly with several owners in that time

[spamcan61]

I think smg201 has already covered most points, the one point that is perhaps worth making, is that when one buys an item from a retailer then your contract is with the retailer NOT the manufacturer. If the item needs returning then it is the retailer you should be dealing with not the manufacturer. What discussions and terms and conditions exist between Dapol and their customers (i.e. retailers) is of no direct relevance to the consumer. Having said that:-

 

- Some manufacturers do offer direct support for items within the manufacturers' warranty, so sometimes it can be expedient to deal directly with them, BUT you cannot be forced to do so.

 

- Keeping receipts is always a good idea anyway.

[Kris]

Thus this is very naughty of Dapol saying they will only deal with warranties with a copy of a purchase receipt as this goes against consumer law.

 

A some what harsh statement given that this has information has come through a 3rd party and the OP has said that it was effectively an overview of what Dapol have said to them. Dapols warranty information clearly states that they will accept other forms other proof of purchase beyond a receipt and that there warranty is in addition to the sales of goods act. Have a look at the bottom of this page to have a read through the information.

I suspect what the OP and Dapol are getting at is that they have been having people trying to claim warranty returns without any proof of purchase and that without a form of POP they will not deal with the return.

 

 

[spamcan61]

 

Thus this is very naughty of Dapol saying they will only deal with warranties with a copy of a purchase receipt as this goes against consumer law.

 

 

I don't think that's exactly what is being stated, the original message concerned Dapol and a retailer (or at least that's how I read it), as has been said that doesn't affect the consumer's statutory rights.

[Gwiwer]

Keeping receipts and keeping a note of what they are for (if that isn't on the receipt) is a virtual "must" for our hobby.

 

It proves ownership, it can be very handy in cases such as we are discussing if an item proves to be faulty or becomes defective. And in the event that an insurance claim is needed the first thing you will be asked for is proof of ownership. Purchase receipts go a long way to meeting that requirement and if they are sufficiently clear in itemising the goods claimed for may be sufficient in their own right.

 

With the widespread use of personal computers it also isn't hard to maintain a database of what is owned, whom it was purchased from and when and how much was paid. I maintain such a list kept on the hard drive and backed up to a flash drive. The scary thing is the bottom line total as mine is set up to add all the purchase prices and show a total. While that might be useful in determining a sum to insure for (and hopefully never to claim for) it is also an alarming reality check on just how much the hobby can cost!

[Mod5]

This includes when buying your item should be satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. If these are not met, you are entitled (with your proof of purchase) a repair, replacement or refund for upto 6 years (though this is a little where the "upto" ends).

 

 

 

Thus this is very naughty of Dapol saying they will only deal with warranties with a copy of a purchase receipt as this goes against consumer law.

 

Before we go too over the top with this if you have proof of purchase it most probably is the purchase receipt. So there will be no problem. As you rightly say all purchases are covered by the relevant legislation under Consumer Rights.

 

So Dapol are not asking for the owner to jump through many hoops and as already pointed out the first port of call with any problems is with the supplier. So can we stick to facts and not accuse Dapol of being naughty.

[smg201]

Ive edited my post to reflect unfair critism of Dapol. I happen to think Dapol are a great Welsh company and wouldnt want to accuse them falsely. On reflection of comments i have removed the line from my initial post. I posted about consumer rights as said in my first post i am shockingly scared by how many people do not know them, thus i brought to attention of readers the sales of good act 1979 as the OP could worry some readers who dont post. I am pleased to hear other posters stories about them acting on there rights and i do hope this debate will help others too.

[Black Sheep]

 

 

I suspect what the OP and Dapol are getting at is that they have been having people trying to claim warranty returns without any proof of purchase and that without a form of POP they will not deal with the return.

 

 

 

No,

 

We have customers coming to us who are regular customers (so we know it came from us), we can see in our records (which we can not forward to Dapol) that they did indeed buy the item from us. We have also had people bring items back with receipts which we check as being from us and the date on it, we then forward the item from us back to Dapol, stating when it was purchased and detailing the problem in a letter with it asking for it to be repaired / replaced (their discretion).

 

Dapol have now started refusing to look at the loco without a copy of the receipt having also been sent, we're not sure why, but we're just going with it as it's easier than arguing with them.

[spamcan61]

 

Dapol have now started refusing to look at the loco without a copy of the receipt having also been sent, we're not sure why.

 

Sounds a bit strange, surely customer receipts are between you and the customer, what's it got to do with the manufacturer? Tell they they can't be supplied under the terms of the Data Protection Act (probably not true but worth a punt )

 

 

 

 

We're just going with it as it's easier than arguing with them.

 

 

LOL, sounds like me and SWMBO.

[Dr Al]

Dapol have now started refusing to look at the loco without a copy of the receipt having also been sent, we're not sure why, but we're just going with it as it's easier than arguing with them.

 

Why ??? It's not like they are going to get sent back counterfiet models! And is that legal? Presumably this may really hit retailers more than punters, who take models back only to find the manufacturer won't - I feel for traders in this case - at least us punters can simply avoid buying Dapol.

 

I guess the key question is: Do Bachmann, Hornby, VITrains, Heljan etc do the same?

 

Another rotten bit of Dapol publicity IMHO, again further hitting my confidence in their ability - maybe I am just overly cynical - they sound like they are aware the number of faulty models they are producing and are trying to limit how much they get back....?

 

Maybe they should build better models that are less likely to fail in the first place....

 

Cheers,

Alan

[Dr Al]

 

Equally, I can understand Dapols position in this, as second hand models (under 6 years old) can change hands very quickly with several owners in that time

 

Does that matter? Surely the models should keep functioning even if they've had several owners......

[bertiedog]

This discussion is getting at Dapol for no real reason, a warranty is only from the maker, the Sale of Goods act governs your rights to repair from the retailer, and dissolves with a sale as second hand......it really is quite simple.

 

The sales proof does not have to be a receipt, any reasonable proofable evidence will suffice in law, both civil and contract, e.g., a Card statement, Bank statement or a Bank transfer or Pay pal transaction, etc., etc.

Warranties offered by the maker are a private offer from the maker and more common in the US, where makers of goods offered the warranty, not the retailer, as in the UK,....It is the shops job to deal with the issue, or the seller, or the mail order house, or Dapol itself if they sell it direct.

 

If an owner of second hand goods, then the issue stops dead, you have no legal rights to G/tee work even if only hours old!!! However the person to contact is the person who sold it to you, and seek recompense from them, and failing that a manufacturer would probably do the work after an explanation of the situation.

 

So Dapol are right to reasonable proof that you are the first owner of the goods , and offer warrenty work, but only at their discretion, but they should provide back up to the shop, when you take the faulty goods back.

 

Stephen.

 

So the first call is the seller, the G/tee is with them ,and fully guaranteed in law.

 

Stephen.

[bertiedog]

Does that matter? Surely the models should keep functioning even if they've had several owners......

 

It matters very deeply indeed, the guarantee under Sale of Goods or a makers warrenty, unless specified in the makers conditions , stops on resale.

 

Some makers may, at their discretion allow the second or subsequent owner to carry on the makers warranty, but nothing in law obliges them to do this, as it could get completely out of hand.

 

There are of course exceptions to the above in case law and precedents set in UK court decisions. S/hand cars for instance have been shown to be under g/tee under certain strict conditions.

 

All of this should clarify the situation, deal with shops or reputable mail order houses and your rights are safe and sure, but wander away from this and the law fails.

 

I feel very sorry that Dapol has come in for this flack, all sales of any type for goods from any maker are covered, and Dapol are not unique or different in asking for proof of purchase..

[Dr Al]

It matters very deeply indeed, the guarantee under Sale of Goods or a makers warrenty, unless specified in the makers conditions , stops on resale.

 

Absolutely - the legality was not really what I was getting at. I was really referring to the longevity of models - I'd expect them to last 5 years (and a lot longer to be honest), and therefore some are likely to change hands.

 

It'd be interesting to actually know how many do last 5 years (obviously some will be killed by irresponsible owners, but other than that)....

 

Cheers,

Alan

[Andy Y]

Bertiedog has given accurate and sensible advice within the posts and on that basis the topic is now closed.

[Dr Al]

This discussion is getting at Dapol for no real reason,

 

I disagree to be honest - Dapol clearly brought this up with retailers, and therefore are likely to draw comment.

 

I think the salient point in my humble opinion is this (directed at all manufacturers) - if the models were made better or more carefully checked and tested there would be less returns and everyone would be happier.

 

I recall reading somewhere that some retailers expected 20-40% of models from a (nameless) manufacturer to be returned. Surely this is a pretty shocking number for something that is essentially mechanically quite simple, and as such a fairly damning indictment of the nature of current mass production.

 

Cheers,

Alan