Slashdot Mirror

I've made a complaint to the ASA [asa.org.uk], and I suggest any other UK residents reading this do the same.

My mistake - that should've been Ofcom (or perhaps Consumer Direct), not the ASA.

There is a time specified, but it's not that one. If you return the goods within 6 months, the onus is on the trader to show that the goods were not defective at the time of purchase. If you return them after six months then the onus is on you to show that they were.

They can and do if you license the software. Read your license. You gave permission. In attempting to revoke the license, I am dropping the software licenses which grant permission.

That may or may not be true for schools. It's certainly not true for consumers, since consumer rights laws in Europe are much stronger than in the US. Unfair clauses and ones that you didn't have the chance to negotiate are automatically discarded. See for example: http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/think_of/unfair-contracts

Rich.

Give Consumer Direct a call: http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/ They'll take your details and put you in touch with a Trading Standards officer. And they _will_ come down like a ton of shit on anyone who messes you around. They're quite good like that :-)

Check out the Trading Standards site. Contact Consumer Direct. Talk to them early and often.

Feel free to CC PC World on all of the discussion that you have with any of these organisations. PC World are taking the piss and they know it - they just don't think that you do.

Before you do ANYTHING else, file a formal complaint with Consumer Direct and get a reference number off them. Do this over the phone (020 8825 6888) so you can explain the problem - PC World is arguing something untenable as that could extend to "you installed Kaspersky anti-virus which is not a default loadset - your warranty is void".

However, if it cracked within 30 days and you bought this on credit you can be a real SOB and cancel the contract altogether. UK law allows you to change your mind on a consumer credit and requires the retailer to completely wind back the transaction (read: no charges or anything - as if nothing happened). They can refuse because of damage, but then it's up to them to prove it's your negligence that caused the damage and I would assume it's easy for you to demonstrate that isn't the case. If you want to follow that line, get EVERYTHING in writing from the moment you start this process because they will try and strech it beyond the 30 days and then tell you you're too late (but the point where you announced the cancellation counts - not when they feel like handling it). You will also encounter "the manager" who will explain to you that you have it wrong, and you can't have your money back but maybe they can give you a new one or one on a discount or an IOU, and they regretfuly have to charge a restocking charge - BS. You are entitled to 100% refund here - they WILL try this. If so, get his name and ask him to put this in writing there and then with a signature so you can ask Trading Standards - you'll find they'll back down at that point because they realise you know precisely what you're doing (I've been there with Dixons as well - they appear to all get the same training :-). AFAIK (IANAL, so check) this may also be the case for a Credit Card paid transaction as that fundamentally amounts to a 30 day credit and thus falls under the same rules.

Note that this doesn't work if you bought something at home from someone YOU invited, that's why people at shows like Ideal Home are so keen to sign you up for a home visit - they know you're then left defenseless against agressive sales tactics.

However, back to the topic. Formally complain to Consumer Direct, then go back to the shop and ask for the manager and give him the complaint reference number and ask him to put in writing his reasons for refusal. Stay calm - they guy will probably be a complete dipshit and try to get you angry as well to claim that you were rude and unwilling to resolve the problem (I know most tricks by now :-).

MAKE SURE YOU GET HIS NAME and then also ask for the address to write to, and the name of the managing director. They may not want to give that to you - when you update Consumer Direct you may want to mention that as well. Note that "PC World Ltd" is listed at Companies House as "application to strike off" (maybe because of name/ownership changes) so it's worth doing this asap - this stuff is usually tied to one legal entity, if it changes shape you may be left in the cold.

Lastly, go back to Consumer Direct and get their assistance in handling this, it's always best to update them anyway. I don't think it will get that far, actually, but you must be seen to be reasonable at all times. If you write any letters, write them from the perspective of a 3rd party reading them, that way it works better in court. Anyone with a clue will recognise that style and worry if it's not better to just sort out the problem, and such letters should always be sent to

They probably don't have a leg to stand on anyway. Unfair terms in a warranty are void under English law, and it's hard to see how a term in a warranty pertaining to software could have any fair bearing on design flaws.

To the OP: a good first stop is www.consumerdirect.gov.uk, a site run by the Office of Fair Trading that offers advice to "consumers". Their advice is extremely vague, but you can contact them with the details of your situation. But an encouraging word from this page:

Exclusion clauses

Some traders might try to escape their responsibilities under contracts by using exclusion clauses, for instance by saying that they accept no liability for loss or damage. If an exclusion clause is unfair it is legally void and cannot be used against you.

Generally, only a court can decide if a contract term is unfair. But any exclusion of liability, whether in a contract term or on a notice, is always void if it is used for the purpose of evading liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence. Also, a trader selling goods cannot exclude liability for a breach of your statutory rights - for instance by displaying a sign saying: 'no refunds given.' An attempt to do this is an offence.

Similar statements about services - for example: 'no responsibility for loss or damage to garments, however caused' on the back of a dry cleaning ticket - are not illegal. But such terms are not enforceable if a court finds them unfair.

There's another line saying they have "more information about Unfair terms in contracts", but the link doesn't work. Like I said, it's vague. I could wish for your sake that UK law had something half as useful as exists in my country. Cold comfort, I fear.

They probably don't have a leg to stand on anyway. Unfair terms in a warranty are void under English law, and it's hard to see how a term in a warranty pertaining to software could have any fair bearing on design flaws.

To the OP: a good first stop is www.consumerdirect.gov.uk, a site run by the Office of Fair Trading that offers advice to "consumers". Their advice is extremely vague, but you can contact them with the details of your situation. But an encouraging word from this page:

Exclusion clauses

Some traders might try to escape their responsibilities under contracts by using exclusion clauses, for instance by saying that they accept no liability for loss or damage. If an exclusion clause is unfair it is legally void and cannot be used against you.

Generally, only a court can decide if a contract term is unfair. But any exclusion of liability, whether in a contract term or on a notice, is always void if it is used for the purpose of evading liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence. Also, a trader selling goods cannot exclude liability for a breach of your statutory rights - for instance by displaying a sign saying: 'no refunds given.' An attempt to do this is an offence.

Similar statements about services - for example: 'no responsibility for loss or damage to garments, however caused' on the back of a dry cleaning ticket - are not illegal. But such terms are not enforceable if a court finds them unfair.

There's another line saying they have "more information about Unfair terms in contracts", but the link doesn't work. Like I said, it's vague. I could wish for your sake that UK law had something half as useful as exists in my country. Cold comfort, I fear.

I thought Sweden already had that kind of legislation, many countries have this. You can for example check out this page from the UK:
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/goods-service/sca ms/fs_u01.shtml
In Norway, such sales or demands for payment are forbidden by the Marketing Law 2a (Markedføringsloven), which says you don't have to pay anything at all. That might exaplain why I never got one.

However, this applies to unsolicited goods. There is probably some other regulations on actual sales, but where the goods or price is wrong. For example in every ad they reserve the right not to sell at the advertised price because of typos. On completed sales I doubt they'd get very far though...

The same thing goes here in the UK, most shops provide for returns over and above statutory rights, as long as I have the receipt I can return almost anything for any reason

You don't actually need the receipt, just some way of reasonably proving you bought at that store - the price label is enough.

http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/your-rights/fs_c0 4.shtml