People in Here Are Quite Negative When Others Want to Pursue Their Consumer Rights. Why?

snook on 21/07/2016 - 12:19
Last edited 21/07/2016 - 21:21

Following on from https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/258099#

I find it unbelievable how many people in here are negative to others when something has gone wrong, and about them pursuing the supplier for refunds or rectification. This guy above copped a bit of a hiding and he was in the right all along.

Do people not understand their rights under consumer law or what?

I'm usually quite careful buying things but it doesn't always work out. When it doesn't work, I consider all my options including the ones where I was just stupid. This has made me pay even more attention to the things I am buying and the small print.

I've just had Masters refuse to price match an item from their store against their Ebay store. I argued with two different Master's employees who said they specifically exclude Ebay and their Ebay store and they would show me where it said that. What? This is irrevelant as it is NOT written in their guarantee. If it's not written there, then it does not exist. They weren't pleasant about it.

Fair Trading agreed with me. $101.50

Bought a Sony TV that was advertised at point of sale with the Foxtel Play app. Tv turned out to be a model NOT supported by Foxtel Play. Sony fobbed me off. I sent photos of the point of sale with Foxtel Play and the model number printed on the same card. I was passed around to different people every 48 hours. They had no intention of doing anything.

Fair Trading agreed with me and I got a bluray player. $128

I bought something where the box said 'no setup required'. Well it did require setup and tech setup at that and we couldn't do it. More a case of couldn't be arsed. We bought something else that worked straight away. Shop refused to take it back and were not nice about it. I asked about this in here and people said it was unreasonable of me to expect it to work out of the box and setup was reasonable. That's just it - if it says no setup, then that's as advertised and it's not my responsibility to work it out.

Fair Trading agreed with me. $129

If you don't hold businesses accountable, they will continue to do what they want and rip people off as most people won't pursue. It's not hard to submit a claim complaint to Fair Trading and they deal with it quite quickly.

Why, when you're all about saving money and getting good product for that money, are people so negative to others about pursuing consumer action when the product/service isn't as advertised?

General Discussion

Comments

  • Diji1 on 21/07/2016 - 12:27
    +2

    Do people not understand their rights under consumer law or what?

    Well no mostly I suspect. Thinking about it I can't really say I do.

    But I believe this happens because Australians usually side with powerful authority figures due to our conservatism as a country - just think of the slavish devotion to glorifying the Defense Forces in spite of the fact that their most recent endeavors have led to ISIS.

    So when a sole individual voices their opinions about an authority figure created by marketing many Australian's natural reaction is to attack the individual since the authority figure is more trusted.

    • ESEMCE on 21/07/2016 - 12:50
      +3

      No, I think it's cause we value our time.. OP and the example link appears to have spent hours trying to resolve a $100 maybe $200 issue.
      My time is worth WAAAY more than that.
      If you can afford to spend multiple hours chasing down a $100 claim, then I'd say you should probably invest that time in education to improve your hourly rate.

      • hell0 on 21/07/2016 - 13:50

        edited

      • snook on 21/07/2016 - 14:11
        +4

        Time wise it didn't take very much from me. Not even an hour total for each one. If I earn less than $100 an hour then it's financially worthwhile.

        • ESEMCE on 21/07/2016 - 14:19

          Agreed.

    • 2ndeffort on 26/07/2016 - 17:51
      +3

      As a former member of the Australian Defence Force I find it almost comical how you try to equate the sacrifice of so many of my former comrades with consumer law. Of all the comparisons and examples you could have drawn you chose to have a dig at those amongst our society willing to literally pout their lives on the line to protect the community that we live in and the values we hold dear. The ADF does not chose which wars it fights, we do what the elected government of the day tells us to do, if you have a problem with the fights the government picks, vote them out, don't take it out on the soldiers that go to war. You would probably find many of those soldiers also disagreed with government decisions but were professional enough to stand with their mates and do their duty! Also, we spell it Defence down here, maybe turn off your American spell checker.

    • tonka on 27/07/2016 - 03:39
      +1

      Gee, concerned that so many upvoted this.
      My grandfather died fighting Nazi's. I never met him but try to take the time to honor him at the appropriate occasions.

      We honor the Defence forces so we remember there are things more important than tax cuts when we vote at elections.

      If you think because you are a non English background you don't need to respect Australian diggers remember the WW2 diggers were fighting against, among other things, racial cleansing.

  • xyron on 21/07/2016 - 12:34

    I think it has something do with the fact that if we want to expect retailers to keep putting on great deals and specials for us, we need to hold up "our end of the deal" by not unnecessarily wasting their time with petty consumer complaints, and take the good with the bad.

    Taking something back to the store simply because you can't be bothered setting it up and wanted to rely on a marketing technicality to get your money back is exactly the kind of pleb behaviour that would discourage stores from running specials in the future.

    As for price matching, I think you were absolutely right to pursue your rights there, and it's a good thing you did.

    TLDR: To me, it's all a matter of degree.

    • plmko on 21/07/2016 - 12:44
      +5

      Having a whinge is more like it. And the type of thinking leads to American style actions like the Starbucks case about ice in a cup.

      At the end of the day regardless of opinion. What would any expect from an internet forum, 100% of everyone to agree like zombies? There would be no point of posting to begin with, because the answer would be pretty clear.

      • [Deactivated] on 22/07/2016 - 09:08
        +2

        People love to have opinions, even on things they know nothing about.

    • robbyjones on 21/07/2016 - 15:12
      +3

      I see your point however I would like to think rather than the consumer be worried about holding our end of the deal and not be petty the retailer do the right thing in the first place and not advertise what is clearly not available. I am a lazy consumer and am quite willing to pay more to not have to set up or build anything, if I was to purchase something that stated this and then it required set up I would most definitely want a refund. It may be a matter of perspective but there would be no issue if the retailers were truthful in advertising.

      • goodcopbadcop on 22/07/2016 - 13:09
        +2

        There are some consumers who are not lazy or have no time. If a product is advertised that there is no setting up required - then that would be a selling point. If in fact that was not the case and it did require the skills, strength and capability to set something up to make it work - then that is false advertising. The type of consumer for which this is a concern are the elderly. My parents are in their 80's and they would be more likely to buy a product that stated no setting up required because sometimes these things are literally beyond their capacity to do. They would be the most vulnerable consumer group to be sucked in and often because it has been difficult for them to get to the shop to purchase - returning it to get a refund is going to be an even bigger and stressful situation because they are usually going to have to haggle with a few people "up the chain" till it eventually gets to the store manager or owner. If nothing else, get those falsely advertised goods off the shelf by you - the "able bodied" can return it relatively easily or report the product and the store to Dept Fair Trading or ACCC.

        plmko - this is not about having a whinge. I think that this raises a very good reason why able bodied people have to be the ones to action returns.

  • Savas on 21/07/2016 - 12:35
    +1

    But the link attached is to positive FB

    • snook on 21/07/2016 - 21:21
      +1

      Sorry, my error in the link. Just meant to link to the page, not my comment. Didn't realise at the time.

  • spychiatrist on 21/07/2016 - 12:54
    +2

    Because people here see thru what the intentions really are. There are some within reason and some who like to take advantage of a loop hole. And some are just d!ckheads. You'll see which one you are based on the respone you get. This is the interwebs, don't be onion-skinned.

  • robertbruce on 21/07/2016 - 12:55
    +1

    a 5 month old battery warranty claim probably isnt a good grounding for comparing the positives and negatives about how people can be here… however yours are and well done on your efforts..

  • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2016 - 13:08
    +3

    I am glad the other poster is going to get all their money back and I agree with their right to fight for it.

    I don't understand all of the negative attitude on that thread but I understand the part about the battery testing costs. It's incredibly risky to spend more money than the original purchase in order to get a refund. I believe, based on some of the comments, that there were cheaper ways to get the faulty battery tested.

    • Hank on 21/07/2016 - 14:09
      +1

      Spending more than the original purchase is not really risky if you understand the legislation and know that the costs are pretty much certain to be all reimbursed.

      Also, the reason it was expensive to get the faulty battery tested was because they did a bunch of other car tests not related to the battery. This was based on incorrect advice by Allianz - you can't really blame them for initially believing someone who is supposed to be a professional in that area.

  • spackbace on 21/07/2016 - 13:28

    Masters price-match example - Why didn't you simply order from eBay, why all the hassle needed to price-match, fair trading etc? (I never get the whole Price match - complain when they don't do it thing. Just order from the cheaper store in the first place, simple)

    Buying a TV for 1 specific app is just a stupid move imo. Foxtel is expensive for what it is, and I certainly wouldn't get a TV to support the app (when countless other devices already do anyway if need be).

    And getting fair trading involved because you couldn't set something up is just funny.

    Oh, and I think you need to check your demeanor when dealing with people and asking for things. If no one is jumping to your aid straight away, then I can only assume you're demanding, or aggressive, or instantly on the defense when approaching these situations.

    Normally when I want a refund, discount, etc, I'm nice to them, and this gets reciprocated. I work (and have worked) in different fields of hospitality. I understand their viewpoint, and they certainly don't want someone being aggressive while asking for something. It doesn't work that way.

    • snook on 21/07/2016 - 13:57
      +6

      Ebay - didn't see it till later, which is the whole point of Master's guarantee actually.

      Foxtel - someone got a trial and we wanted to watch the Euro and couldn't. When I googled it I found lots of people had the same problem with different Sony TV's and Sony didn't care. The people 'thought' point of sale said Foxtel but they couldn't remember. For other people this was important. I don't really care about the TV or anything on it, but Sony shouldn't be doing that.

      I gave that item to someone else in our house to sort out. They got help and advice and couldn't make it work. When you get something that plugs straight in and works, dealing with that thing and their useless help people would have been heaps more time. I just took it back, said it didn't work for us and could I please have my money back. They refused to take it and referred me to the manufacturer. Everyone knows that the seller can't refer you to the manufacturer for an issue with the product they sold.

      I work with 'customers' and nice ones always get treated better, or I should say, I have more time for them.

      • SirFlibbled on 27/07/2016 - 10:23

        The point of sale was the place you needed to complain about the Sony TV as they were the ones who made the misleading statement, not Sony.

        • snook on 27/07/2016 - 18:18

          Lol, you'd reckon yeah but I actually bought the tv from the Sony store :)

  • hell0 on 21/07/2016 - 13:56
    -3

    "If it's not written there, then it does not exist"

    You see, this is where you are wrong. It doesn't say many things. I think you are a fine example of a bully, that knows that when you cause enough frustration & time-wasting you will get what you want. And you sadly don't realise it…

    • snook on 21/07/2016 - 13:58

      I already write too much. I abbreviated in simple words for ease of explanation, so no, but good try :)

  • holdenmg on 21/07/2016 - 15:03
    -1

    In your previous post of 21 April, 2016, "Masters sells sale items BEFORE date advertised in catalogue #mastersisuseless" you previously stated:

    "I am really p'ed off about this because they totally wasted my time. I will never look at Masters catalogue again and unless I'm desperate, I'm not shopping there again."

    Not shopping at Masters is good advice.

    • spychiatrist on 21/07/2016 - 16:04

      Not if one is egotistic and would like to make some coin or get something from nothing

    • snook on 21/07/2016 - 21:01

      Haha, this is quite true and I've called it quits.

      We're building some new bathrooms and I needed 2 basins. I have been looking at basins since last year. Typical of that well known -i'm-never-shopping-there-again- curse, the only one I saw that i liked was in … you guessed it … Masters … back in February. I thought I'd find the same thing somewhere else but I couldn't.

      So I had to go back … and that's what happened.

  • bargainslut on 21/07/2016 - 16:14
    +4

    The main reason OP is because most are conditioned. 'The dumb majority'

    Well done on getting the money back, I would have done likewise.

    Learn the rules like a pro and break them like an artist

  • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2016 - 19:06
    +3

    I think a consumer can generally pick holes in description of most items they purchase if they try hard enough. Some of the returns I see at particular store are such a waste - consumer put in no effort at all to understand what they buy, and return perfect items which are then sold as used item at loss. It costs business money, and affects their ability to give good prices. Consumer needs to take some responsibility too.

    • goodcopbadcop on 22/07/2016 - 13:21
      +2

      Really??? I like to think that I am a consumer who makes purchases that have been well researched online and also considered carefully. For this reason, I expect that the product will do what it says it will do and that would be the sole purpose for returning it - because it doesn't. The amount of products in the market place is huge - and each one trying to cut costs or appeal to the buyer through advertising. I don't look at a product hoping to pick holes in it. I research it to make sure that it is value for money, and that includes the quality of the materials used to manufacture it and that it will last for what is considered at least "normal" amount of time. This is the way that I - as a consumer is taking responsibility. And I'd say that I am not alone.

      • [Deactivated] on 22/07/2016 - 13:52
        +1

        Yes I agree your approach is good. But lots make no effort.

        • cwongtech on 24/07/2016 - 00:53

          Also a lot shout they will contact ACCC for not giving them a refund for change of mind

  • tonka on 23/07/2016 - 23:34
    +1

    My suspicion is that the people on here that argue on behalf of the retailer and their employees are actually the very same people.

    So basically if you come on here to vent about Masters employees it's very likely you may end up with comments from Masters or Woolworths employees (and their mothers). There will also be fanboys.

    The other side is if the OP shows signs of being aggressive or bullying then people will suspect there is more to the story.

  • tonyjzx on 24/07/2016 - 14:40
    +1

    To exercise your consumer rights requires assertiveness AND knowledge.

    If people are tenacious and they get what is owed to them I guess the basement dwellers here in their passive aggressiveness dont like that.

    Many people seem afraid to put their voice out and are afraid to be knocked down if unsuccessful.

    I get that to some degree, if you get knocked back then you stand there like a fool unless you have some other avenue to go.

    I always side with the consumer, even the belligerent ones unless their request is completely unreasonable.

    Why would I side with big big business with their legal clout? I expect a business to have better behavior than the consumer. I am frequently disappointed when they dont.

  • MustacheFire on 27/07/2016 - 10:25
    +1

    OP - you are awesome. Great work keeping retailers in line :)

  • SirFlibbled on 27/07/2016 - 10:28
    +1

    Nothing gets my goat more than when a business doesn't act within the ACL.

    I once bought a phone from a well known retailer which was advertised as water proof. I ended up accidentally having it dipped in water for about 10 seconds (long story). This shouldn't have caused damage to the phone as it met the standards it was advertised at (which I did research on before putting in a warranty claim).

    The store sent the phone off for evaluation and came back saying that the warranty didn't include water damage.

    I asked politely for the manager. When the manager came, I asked if he would be the one who would be going to court to explain why they wouldn't warranty water damage at all on a phone advertised as water proof? I had a refund in 2 minutes.

  • lisss on 04/08/2016 - 19:58

    Which fair trading has actually helped you? I've reported an issue to Fair Trading WA and they just ignored it. Was a waste of my time.

    • snook on 05/08/2016 - 11:00

      NSW. Times varied but none longer than 2 months.

      I have a feeling that if something is missing from your case, in terms of the fine print being read wrong, or if there is nothing they can do, they don't get back to you.

      I bought a book via paypal from David Thornton (that spider guy). $40+ dollars. It never arrived. I went overseas and missed the paypal lodgement window. I contacted him directly and some office helper said they'd had a problem with paypal and their order system and would fix it and send me another one. Then they ignored me. Fair Trading wouldn't do anything about it BECAUSE - David Thornton is SA so sent to to SA Fair Trading. He has no fixed Australian business address. Without the fixed address they said there's nothing they can do. If I hadn't followed up and pushed them, I wouldn't have found out why they let it go. This same thing happened to many, many other people so that guy is a proper tool.

      • Euphemistic on 08/08/2016 - 16:34

        Did you send him a picture of a spider?

  • exc3113nce on 08/08/2016 - 09:58

    Did Sony get back to you at all during the fair trading application? What was the time frame between you first contacting them and Fair Trading finalising the claim in your favour?

    The Sony issue seems like a pretty straight forward breach of contract/ misrep that although minor would mean they pay you for whatever it costs to get Foxtel on to the TV.

    • snook on 08/08/2016 - 10:38

      I told them I was going to Fair Trading. I don't know if it hurried them up but Fair Trading spoke to them within about 4-5 days, at about the same time they offered me the player and I went back to Fair Trading and told them that I accepted that offer.

      bluray player. $128

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join