When is a new suite not a new suite?

beyond the blue

beyond the blue

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,036
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just recently had a "new" suite delivered. It's from one of the big sellers and has got this manufactured date on it. We had to wait six weeks for it as the salesman said they were "made to order". Just a tad naughty I think.


label.jpg
 
Hope for sake it isn't from MultiYork.
Matt
 
I would be interested to know who the "big seller" was as I am helping a friend choose and order a new suite at the moment, forewarned is forearmed so to speak
 
Three things of note to me.

The postcode identifies the manufacturing site who presumably make for more than one high street brand/name.

The manufacturing "check" stage label has no stamps or initials to designate it has passed its QC steps ~ this label constitutes part of the audit trail of its manufacture.

At that 2013 date IMO there is no way that can be described as new/made to order (for you).

On those two latter elements I would reject it or at the very least want a written explanation of its status PLUS what about the guarantee? Is it in consumer law deemed to run from date of first sale or from manufactured date.

It is possibly not just naughty but maybe in breach of trading law & sale of goods acts.
 
Last edited:
I'd be tempted to ask local Trading standards to take a look at it - on fire safety grounds
 
Personally I would be waiting on the shops doorstep ,armed with that photo ,a scowling face ,and a very bad temper
 
When the suite arrived it had some damage and this was repaired by Homeserve repairers (very efficiently), apparently they get quite a lot of work from the place where I bought it from. I was asked by the seller to report anything I wasn't happy with to Homeserve and they will send a written report to them within 24 hrs, as yet I have heard nothing back from them. I am trying not to get too wound up about it to be honest (can do without the stress at the moment). But I will admit to being a bit p****d off about the manufactured date.
 
beyond the blue said:
When the suite arrived it had some damage and this was repaired by Homeserve repairers (very efficiently), apparently they get quite a lot of work from the place where I bought it from. I was asked by the seller to report anything I wasn't happy with to Homeserve and they will send a written report to them within 24 hrs, as yet I have heard nothing back from them. I am trying not to get too wound up about it to be honest (can do without the stress at the moment). But I will admit to being a bit p****d off about the manufactured date.
Click to expand...

Were I in your shoes I would contact Trading Standards asap. Why, well the process you describe I.e. by accepting repairs to new(?) goods might have affected your rights to reject them on the possible basis (in your case?) of not as described under Trade Descriptions. (NB arriving damaged might fall under the "not of merchantable quality" as a reasonable cause to reject the goods)

I hope you are able to settle your mind on this soon as you can without adding to your stress levels.
 
the black fox said:
Personally I would be waiting on the shops doorstep ,armed with that photo ,a scowling face ,and a very bad temper
Click to expand...

The suite was manufactured by Buoyant Upholstery (this is not who I bought it off) In a way I can't blame Buoyant for getting rid of some old stock. It's the store that then passed it on "as new" that annoys me.


I have found this review from someone who has had it worse than me.....

Jenni N Steve Parry reviewed Buoyant upholstery – 1 star
16 February 2015 ·
Last July I received a sofa 'New' from Buoyant...... ummm yeah right, label states Date Of Manufactuer 2006! Avoid, avoid, AVOID......... Trading Standards ARE investigating!
 
Last edited:
beyond the blue said:
The suite was manufactured by Buoyant Upholstery (this is not who I bought it off) In a way I can't blame Buoyant for getting rid of some old stock. It's the store that then passed it on "as new" that annoys me.


I have found this review from someone who has had it worse than me.....

Jenni N Steve Parry reviewed Buoyant upholstery – 1 star
16 February 2015 ·
Last July I received a sofa 'New' from Buoyant...... ummm yeah right, label states Date Of Manufactuer 2006! Avoid, avoid, AVOID......... Trading Standards ARE investigating!
Click to expand...

Did you buy direct from Buoyant or a 'high street' shop?

Whichever one it was how did you pay?

If I recall correctly if you paid >£100 as part payment on your credit card you have what I think it is called section 75 protection i.e. the whole of the purchase price is covered by the credit card payment protection scheme. Do check with CAB and/or Trading Standards but AFAIK it works in that you have grounds to reject the goods & if the store disputes that you report "it" to the CC company, the CC company gives you 100% of the purchase price back and they claim it back from the supplier.

So do please check what your rights are and act promptly.

Best of luck getting it sorted to your satisfaction :)
 
Box Brownie said:
Were I in your shoes I would contact Trading Standards asap. Why, well the process you describe I.e. by accepting repairs to new(?) goods might have affected your rights to reject them on the possible basis (in your case?) of not as described under Trade Descriptions. (NB arriving damaged might fall under the "not of merchantable quality" as a reasonable cause to reject the goods)

I hope you are able to settle your mind on this soon as you can without adding to your stress levels.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you say. Lets say I report them to Trading Standards and they investigate and find that the seller is in breach of trading standards rules, what happens then? Do I lose my Suite? Am I compensated in some way? Are they punished? I must add that the Suite looks very nice now it's been repaired and it's very comfy.
 
beyond the blue said:
I agree with what you say. Lets say I report them to Trading Standards and they investigate and find that the seller is in breach of trading standards rules, what happens then? Do I lose my Suite? Am I compensated in some way? Are they punished? I must add that the Suite looks very nice now it's been repaired and it's very comfy.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, if it works, is comfortable and is, in your eyes, worth what you paid for it, is there any real benefit to pushing this?

I used to get wound up all the time about stuff not being 'as promised', but now I ask myself 'does it really matter in this instance?'
 
Furtim said:
At the end of the day, if it works, is comfortable and is, in your eyes, worth what you paid for it, is there any real benefit to pushing this?

I used to get wound up all the time about stuff not being 'as promised', but now I ask myself 'does it really matter in this instance?'
Click to expand...

Exactly David! Ok I don't think it's worth what i paid for it to be honest, especially the condition it arrived in. But is this not taking a selfish attitude to it? What about other people being sold Items that are described "as new" when in fact they are many years old.
It probably isn't a trading offence to sell old items unless it is advertised as new. In my case there were suites in the store that had a sign on them that said they were available within 7 days, the suite I wanted didn't, and when i asked why the one I wanted was 6-8 week delivery the answer was " because this suite is only made to order" which is not true, so why should they get away with it? I just want to make it clear to anyone reading this thread that I am not seeking any kind of compensation, nor do I want to loose the suite. however it has left me with a nasty taste in my mouth.
 
beyond the blue said:
Exactly David! Ok I don't think it's worth what i paid for it to be honest, especially the condition it arrived in. But is this not taking a selfish attitude to it? What about other people being sold Items that are described "as new" when in fact they are many years old.
It probably isn't a trading offence to sell old items unless it is advertised as new. In my case there were suites in the store that had a sign on them that said they were available within 7 days, the suite I wanted didn't, and when i asked why the one I wanted was 6-8 week delivery the answer was " because this suite is only made to order" which is not true, so why should they get away with it? I just want to make it clear to anyone reading this thread that I am not seeking any kind of compensation, nor do I want to loose the suite. however it has left me with a nasty taste in my mouth.
Click to expand...

You don't want them 'to get away with it' but you are 'not seeking any kind of compensation, nor do I want to loose the suite'. What do you want?
 
beyond the blue said:
Exactly David! Ok I don't think it's worth what i paid for it to be honest, especially the condition it arrived in. But is this not taking a selfish attitude to it? What about other people being sold Items that are described "as new" when in fact they are many years old.
It probably isn't a trading offence to sell old items unless it is advertised as new. In my case there were suites in the store that had a sign on them that said they were available within 7 days, the suite I wanted didn't, and when i asked why the one I wanted was 6-8 week delivery the answer was " because this suite is only made to order" which is not true, so why should they get away with it? I just want to make it clear to anyone reading this thread that I am not seeking any kind of compensation, nor do I want to loose the suite. however it has left me with a nasty taste in my mouth.
Click to expand...

It's a balance really - yes it's a little selfish (as in I'm okay jack, I don't care about the next person), but to quote another cliche, you have to pick your battles as there are only so many days in a life!

Had they left you completely in the lurch, or not repaired to a satisfactory standard, then I'd go for it! Had it significantly affected the (resale) value - yup - fight it all the way. In this situation I'd be more bothered about spending another three months sitting on bean bags though :) (We had the same situation when we ordered from Harvey's over 10 years ago; took near on 3 months to deliver, and then it was damaged. They fixed it, it was okay, and 10 years later it's still going strong and just as comfortable to sit on!)
 
MartynK said:
You don't want them 'to get away with it' but you are 'not seeking any kind of compensation, nor do I want to loose the suite'. What do you want?
Click to expand...

Ok let me try again!...... I am not seeking any "financial" compensation. Nor do I want to send the suite back or have a replacement. On the other hand nor do I want to see a very large high street retailer selling goods as "made to order" when in fact they were made many years ago. But more importantly I DON'T want an argument with you.
 
I don't think that 'date of manufacture' means what you think it does.

I think it's a type approval date.

Just step back a second and think how much it'd cost to store a suite for 3 years?

In these days of 'just in time' production, do you really think there's warehouses full of 3 or even 9 year old sofas?
 
Phil V said:
I don't think that 'date of manufacture' means what you think it does.

I think it's a type approval date.

Just step back a second and think how much it'd cost to store a suite for 3 years?

In these days of 'just in time' production, do you really think there's warehouses full of 3 or even 9 year old sofas?
Click to expand...

You may be right Phil??? Good job I've not done anything about it yet. If I do decide to do something I will get it checked out before I shoot myself in the foot.
 
beyond the blue said:
In my case there were suites in the store that had a sign on them that said they were available within 7 days, the suite I wanted didn't,
Click to expand...

It's possible you've been supplied with one that another store already had in stock as a `demo` & getting rid of older stock?

Give Bouyant a ring (01282 691631) & ask them what the date code is.
 
Phil V said:
I think it's a type approval date.
Click to expand...
Not required from a quick glance through the regulations. The label appears to be neither the long form (Part II of Schedule 7 of the regulations) nor the short form (Part III of Schedule 7), it's some sort of bastardised extended version of the short form label.

If I was being really picky and was asked to audit this against the regulations, I'd query whether or not this label was compliant - the regulations are quite clear in specifying what information the label must provide and the order in which that information is to be set out.

See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/1324/schedule/7/made


But "Load/Date of Manufacture"is in itself ambiguous what is "Load"? and whilst it's followed by a six-digit number that resembles a date, a lot of six figure numbers resemble dates.
 
I understand that you were told it's new, but suites don't have sell by dates.

I have stock that's been sat on my shelf for two years, it's still new and will be sold as such.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top