Shopping Express Not Providing Replacement Warranty within Reasonable Time

AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 15:05

I bought the MSI Armor 8GB RTX 2070 in the November special towards end of last year.

It shortly experienced issues and eventually failed with Artefacts.

I sent in for warranty at the end of Jan this year at my own shipping costs $30.

Has been with them for a month already and have also admitted the graphics card to be DOA.

They have offered me either a refund at the special price I bought this item for, or wait for this card that they have been taking such a long time to process with no time-frame.

Naturally I would just get the refund, but because there are no specials on at the moment I would be losing out.

This would be like a business misleading consumers by selling a once off deal product at a greatly reduced price, then not having supply for them when they fail for warranty.

I have seen that you can obtain a new MSI ARMOR 8GB RTX 2070 off their site with an expected time frame of 3-5 days dispatch from their warehouse.

What are my options?

Computing Computer Component MSI Video Card

Related Stores

Shopping Express
Shopping Express

Comments

  • o53djz7qTPY4der on 25/02/2019 - 15:20
    +14

    They're giving you back what you paid. How are you at a loss?

    Take the refund.. look for another deal.

  • p1 ama on 25/02/2019 - 15:21
    +3

    What are my options?

    Take the refund. What do you want them to do if they don't have any stock?

    This would be like a business misleading consumers by selling a once off deal product at a greatly reduced price, then not having supply for them when they fail for warranty.

    What?

    So it's misleading to sell off EOL clearance items which will no longer be produced?

    • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 15:38

      I would have happily accepted the fact that it was an EOL clearance item.

      However, how can this be the case if they are selling the equivalent item on their website?

      • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 15:44

        They might have a contract with a supplier to basically order-in on a per-order basis. They would be perpetually at 0 stock.

      • qwerty on 25/02/2019 - 16:09

        Because if they offered you the deal in reverse - you had a new one doa and they gave you old end of life stock in return you would get upset

        Which is why a refund is more appropriate in this case

  • ozhunter on 25/02/2019 - 15:25
    +1

    What are my options?

    Take the refund and buy elsewhere.

    then not having supply for them when they fail for warranty.

    So you expect them to have 1:1 stock of every item they have in case of a warranty claim?

    • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 15:40

      It is never expected of a manufacturer to have 1:1 stock of every item in case they have a warranty claim.

      What is expected however is for the manufacturer to have a reasonable time frame to acquire the stock in the event that the product fails.

      If a manufacturer decided to keep 1:1 stock, they obviously aren't providing a quality product, rather an expectation that the product will fail.

      • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 15:44

        What is expected

        Expected by whom?

        • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:21

          Expected by the consumer, as part of the ACCC:

          Manufacturers and importers guarantee that their goods:

          are of acceptable quality
          have been accurately described
          satisfy any manufacturer’s express warranty
          have spare parts and repair facilities reasonably available for a reasonable period of time, unless the consumer is advised otherwise.

          • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:32
            +2

            @AL008: Shopping Express is the retailer, not a "manufacturer or importer". Plus - that's spare parts and repair facilities, not replacements. I honestly think you have a valid claim (but should accept the refund), but mate, learn to read.

            • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:47
              -2

              @HighAndDry: Thanks, I learnt to read quite some many moons ago, but maybe so should you.

              So a retailer cannot be an importer?

              Dictionary result for importer

              1.
              a person or organization that brings goods or services into a country from abroad for sale.

              Whilst spare parts and repair facilities are not equivalent to the actual item itself, it does indicate that these correlate with another.
              How can you expect to replace an item if you do not have spare parts or repair facilities reasonably available.

              If the business fails to give you a free repair within a reasonable time or cannot fix your problem, you can:

              get it done elsewhere and pass on the costs to the business
              ask for a replacement
              ask for a refund
              recover compensation for the drop in value below the price paid.

              So in the case of the above example, I am asking for a replacement, in which I haven't been given a reasonable time for getting this.

  • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 15:33

    According to ACL you should be able to choose between a refund or a replacement. But its your call if you want to fight them on it. If you want to pursue it go to the ACCC or your local consumer protection bureau.
    https://www.accc.gov.au/contact-us/other-helpful-agencies/co…
    Do you have the receipt for shipping? They should be giving you shipping costs + original price if you decide to accept the refund.

    • Randxyz123 on 25/02/2019 - 15:35
      +2

      No, the business can choose replacement or repair or refund.

      If it is no longer in stock then they can refund. It is completely in line with the law.

      Maybe at some point, they will update the law to account for the large amount of internet buying that is going on.

      • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 15:37
        +1

        No, the business can choose replacement or repair or refund.

        That isn't what it says on the ACCC website
        https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees…

        If it is no longer in stock then they can refund. It is completely in line with the law.

        That may be true but according to OP the product is in stock on their website.

        • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 15:43

          the product is in stock on their website.

          This isn't actually binding.

          • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 15:50

            @HighAndDry: Good enough for an ACCC complaint.

            • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 15:53

              @gear50: ACCC complaint won't do anything.

              • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 15:57

                @HighAndDry: I've personally found companies that violate ACL to be a lot more cooperative when you file an ACCC complaint. Why do you think that it wont do anything?

                • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:01

                  @gear50:

                  companies that violate ACL

                  Sure, and I'm saying noone's violated the ACL here. They're offering OP a refund. Also the ACCC doesn't deal with consumer complaints - they'll accept it and file it away in case there's widespread abuse or non-compliance. They don't deal with one-off cases.

                  • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:23
                    -1

                    @HighAndDry: The ACCC in actual fact does deal with consumer complaints.

                    I've dealt with them in the past and had success with Citizen Australia.

                    MSY had fines resulting up to $750K due to consumer complaints

                  • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 16:23

                    @HighAndDry: section 262 schedule 2 subsection 4 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 states:

                    (4) The supplier must, in accordance with an election made by the consumer:
                    (a) refund:
                    (i) any money paid by the consumer for the goods; and
                    (ii) an amount that is equal to the value of any other consideration provided by the consumer for the goods; or
                    (b) replace the rejected goods with goods of the same type, and of similar value, if such goods are reasonably available to the supplier.

                    I think that's pretty clear

                    Also the ACCC doesn't deal with consumer complaints - they'll accept it and file it away in case there's widespread abuse or non-compliance. They don't deal with one-off cases.

                    That's true but part of the process is that they notify the company that they have a complaint about them. The company usually tries to please the complainant because they don't want larger action brought by the ACCC

                    • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:30

                      @gear50: Yes, I know that the ACL is technically Schedule 2 to the CCA. People have been quoting the ACL all through the thread, what's your point? It says clearly:

                      if such goods are reasonably available to the supplier.

                      Only thing OP has is that SE has the product on their online page - OP hasn't even bought one to see if they're really available or not.

                      The company usually tries to please the complainant because they don't want larger action brought by the ACCC

                      The ACCC won't do anything on the basis of a single complaint.

                      • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 16:35

                        @HighAndDry:

                        OP hasn't even bought one to see if they're really available or not.

                        Thats not the test to see if something is reasonably available. A reasonable person would say that the retailer advertising the product on their website as in stock is the same as saying its reasonably available.

                        At any rate the ACCC could ask them if they have the product reasonably available. They can either lie to them and say they dont have stock or OP a give a replacement.

                        • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:40

                          @gear50:

                          A reasonable person would say that the retailer advertising the product on their website as in stock is the same as saying its reasonably available.

                          No they wouldn't - you may expect it, but it's not binding. It has to be actually reasonably available, not just what "someone thinks the store is saying is reasonably available".

                          • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 16:48

                            @HighAndDry: Sounds like something your local consumer protection agency could clear up. A 30 second call to SE's supplier should do it.

                            In OP's case it doesnt seem like SE is claiming that they aren't able to get the card from their supplier. They just want to refund and move on.

                            • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:50

                              @gear50: ACCC doesn't investigate isolated incidents, and certainly doesn't deal with single-case consumer complaints.

                              • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 16:54

                                @HighAndDry: No but OP's local consumer agency does and thats who I recommended he complain to

        • qwerty on 25/02/2019 - 16:11

          Its not the same product

          Its like saying a 2017 car is the same as a 2019 car

          The newer one is different - different box and i think different build and if the acl was allowed in reverse people would be kicking up a stink

          • gear50 on 25/02/2019 - 16:27

            @qwerty: So you're saying the same model of card from the same manufacturer is substantially different between stock sold in late november compared to 2 months later? I don't think there have been any changes in that time. Depending on their inventory it could even be from the same batch.

            • qwerty on 25/02/2019 - 18:43

              @gear50: Revisions happen all the time with tech

              The mate20 pro phone for example

              2 versions floating around 1 gets green screened , the other doesn't

              if you had one without green screen that was doa and then got given one with green screen as replacement you would be pissed off especially since green tinge screen wouldn't be seen as a major issue under the ACL.

      • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 15:44

        When you have a major problem with a product, you have the right to ask for your choice of a replacement or refund. For a major problem with a service, you can choose to receive compensation for the drop in value below the price paid, or a refund.

        • Gronk on 25/02/2019 - 16:23
          +1

          you have the right to ask for your choice of a replacement or refund

          And given you've been offered both of those options, your problem is?

          • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:27

            @Gronk: I haven't been given the appropriate option of a choice of replacement.
            As there has been no timeline given of a replacement.
            Which is equivalent to a non-replacement anyways.

            • Gronk on 25/02/2019 - 16:30

              @AL008: When you say choice of replacement - are you indicating that you should be given another product because they can't offer the exact same product you purchased?

              I'd be fine with that, you'd just have to cover the difference between what you'd paid and the cost of the replacement item, which would effectively be a refund anyway.

              • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:39

                @Gronk: No, what I'm saying is that the exact same product I sent in that was DOA, they cannot provide a time of when they can give me the exact same model back as a replacement.

                • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:41

                  @AL008: That might imply that the product is not reasonable available.

                  • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 16:52

                    @HighAndDry: That would imply wrong.

                    Seeing as the website tells you exactly when the item will be dispatched:

                    'Dispatch from warehouse in 3-5 working days'

                    • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:53

                      @AL008: The website provides general information that are (since we're on OzB) often incorrect. The website is also utterly not binding on the store, other than in certain circumstances regarding misleading advertising.

                • Gronk on 25/02/2019 - 16:48

                  @AL008: Under those circumstances I'd be opting for a refund then.

  • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 15:42

    This would be like a business misleading consumers by selling a once off deal product at a greatly reduced price, then not having supply for them when they fail for warranty.

    I feel you're failing to understand what the term "once off" means.

    • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 15:47

      Once off deal implies the price you paid for them.

      I am not getting a refund for the item and wanting to buy back at the price I paid.

      This is called warranty replacement, as implied in the ACCC guidelines.

      It wouldn't matter what price you paid for an item, you would be entitled to a replacement, they can't refuse that.

      • HighAndDry on 25/02/2019 - 16:00

        This is called warranty replacement, as implied in the ACCC guidelines.

        You're not even talking about a "warranty" here. Warranties are given by shops or manufacturers. You're talking about a consumer guarantee if you're quoting the ACL.

  • AL008 on 25/02/2019 - 17:33
    -5

    Thanks all for feedback, have directed to ACCC.

    Will keep you guys updated.

    • p1 ama on 25/02/2019 - 21:11
      +2

      Why would you direct it to the ACCC? I actually used to work for the ACCC and the amount of misdirected complaints the call centre got was ridiculous. If you have a look at the guidelines published by the ACCC, available here: https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/australian-competition-cons…

      They specifically say that they cannot:

      provide dispute resolution services between consumers and businesses.

      This means that you will not get any action if you report it to the ACCC. They will basically take your name and that's it. They also specifically say that they cannot:

      act on your behalf or provide you with legal advice on your rights and obligations under the law

      or

      make formal decisions on whether a person or business had breached the law as only the courts can do this

      Basically, you're not going to the right place and nothing will come of what you are doing. If you wish to pursue this matter further, the best place for you to go is Consumer Affairs in your state. They will be able to give you more specific advice, but again, cannot take action on your behalf.

      Now, this is the kicker. If you believe that Shopping Express have breached their contract with you, then your only course of action is to take them to the tribunal (i.e. small claims court). If you really believe that your interpretation of the law is correct (I'm not a lawyer, so I can't give any legal advice, though my experience with these matters is that it isn't), then put your money where your mouth is and let a judge rule in your favour. Anything else (e.g. compaining on here) is just tyre-kicking and whinging.

      Ultimately, your efforts to convince people on an internet forum is useless. You've asked the question and you've gotten the response. The only person you need to convince is a judge.

      So your original question is:

      What are my options?

      The direct answer:

      1) Take the refund
      2) Take them to court

      Your choice. Nobody is going to pick up this case and chase after them on your behalf. That's a complete waste of taxpayer money.

  • aussieprepper on 25/02/2019 - 18:37
    +1

    Why not just take the refund? Ask for the shipping cost and be done?
    Maybe they can no longer get the card for the same price from the supplier? Are they really meant to take a hit and lose money for an issue that is not the the stores fault?
    You could also ask MSI what they think? Maybe if you get the card back and send it directly to them they will replace the card?

  • blitz on 25/02/2019 - 23:30
    +1

    But honestly, imagine working at the ACCC.

  • Never Pay RRP on 26/02/2019 - 11:53
    +1

    "Naturally I would just get the refund, but because there are no specials on at the moment I would be losing out."
    Like others on here, I fail to understand how you are "losing out". In fact if anything you are probably better off, as the item would presumably depreciate in value over time, and you will probably be able to pick it up cheaper at some stage.
    As mentioned before, get the refund including the postage and you are 100% square

  • Brendoo on 26/02/2019 - 13:54
    +1

    Man, take the refund as fast as you can! If the store has such poor customer service I’d want to get my money back and have nothing to do with them. And with the dropping graphics card prices you may even find an equivalent one cheaper than what you paid anyway.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join