If you took a broken television back to the shop where you’d bought it a year and a month ago and were told you were out of luck as the guarantee had run out, would you accept this? Or would you demand a repair or replacement? Sadly the overwhelming majority of us would probably accept the shop’s word that it was out of guarantee.
The good news is that EU rules mean you can take goods back up to two years later and obtain a replacement, even if the guarantee has expired.
Staff at the European Commission told Guardian Money this week that shoppers have an extremely strong case for demanding a repair, replacement or refund on items up to two years old – the minimum guarantee for all member states, including the UK. It is not a new rule, but it seems few shoppers or retailers are familiar with it.
One man who is fully aware of his rights, and was happy to take on the country’s biggest retailer, is Peter Ward. He has just forced Tesco to replace a television even though it failed after 18 months. It took a long, and at times ugly, standoff during which he was threatened with forcible eviction from the store.
The retired teacher, who lives with his wife Gill in Liversedge near Leeds, bought the £400 Technika set from Tesco’s Batley branch. When it went wrong two weeks ago, Ward called Tesco’s repair helpline. After two 30-minute calls (at 10p per minute) he was told that the company stocked no parts and, because the TVs were “foreign made”, no repairs were possible. This is in spite of the fact that Technika is a Tesco own-brand.
“I had read in a Reader’s Digest book that all electronic items sold in Europe are now covered by the EU consumer rules which give the buyer a right to repair or replacement if the item failed within two years. So I wasn’t going to back down,” Ward says.
Armed with this information, the couple took the set back to the Batley branch, where the duty manager told them that as the set was more than 12 months old Tesco would not repair or replace it.
The Wards cited the EU rules, and a half-an-hour standoff ensued. A security guard threatened to forcibly remove them, and said he had called the police. “Eventually the manager went off to telephone someone at head office. He returned admitting that the European law was correct, and as the Technika set was not repairable we were entitled to a new set.”
The couple have since been given a replacement set worth £280, although Peter is still not entirely happy. “Tesco has also agreed to pay £111 to have our aerial upgraded as the replacement set would not work with our existing set-up. They have also offered a £75 clubcard payment, or £280 if I reject the TV. However the like-for-like replacement costs a further £120, and I’ve still got no apology for being treated like a criminal just for exercising my consumer rights,” he says. “Had I not stuck to my guns, the most I would have got is £200 according to Tesco’s documentation. How such a large company gets away with denying consumers their rights is beyond me,” he says.
One reason stores are getting away with it is that the law in the area is complicated. The UK’s Sale of Goods Act (Soga) gives consumers a longer protection period – up to six years, although in practice consumers find it difficult to enforce.
While the European Union website clearly backs up the two-year guarantee, you will find no information of the two-year rule on the government’s Consumer Direct website. “Sellers … are obliged to guarantee the conformity of the goods with the contract for a period of two years after the delivery of the goods,” the EU says.
An updated directive is being worked on, although it is not expected to become law for at least another year.
According to Which? consumer lawyer Chris Warner, too few people are aware of their rights. “While it is true that the EU consumer rules mean stores should repair or replace items that break inside two years, Soga affords consumers protection up to six years from the date of purchase.”
The act says all goods sold have to be of “satisfactory quality and fit for purpose”, however he admits that getting a refund for a broken item in the UK is a bit hit and miss once it is more than a year old.
“The confusion arises from the existence of manufacturer guarantees. These are often for one year and often consumers will be told that when the manufacturer’s guarantee runs out, there is nothing else that can be done. This is not right in most cases.
“The courts will judge what is reasonable. Clearly if you buy a £10 iron, your expectations are not the same as if you’ve bought the top-of-the-range model. If you bought the latter and it failed after four years, it would be reasonable to argue that it should have lasted longer, and that a repair or replacement is due.
“I don’t think it’s too cynical to say that retailers have been happy to let consumers think they have only a year’s guarantee,” he says.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Business said a forthcoming consumer white paper will include proposals to further clarify the law. “We will also be launching a campaign to raise awareness of consumer rights.”
Perhaps, if more people take Peter Ward’s approach, retailers will eventually have to adopt the John Lewis stance and give a two-year guarantee on products. Last year we exposed how Amazon was offering repairs on items only up to six months old, relying on consumers deciding it wasn’t worth pursuing the online retailer.
Meanwhile, momentum appears to be gathering behind the EC’s plan to impose a pan-European guarantee on all products, so you could buy something in Lyons and return it in Manchester. That right may be as little as a year away.
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion