Bike shop turned my bike into Frankenstein's monster...advice?

[PH]

Secondhand bike = no contract

thats not complicated at all, its very simple.

Well, what's complicated is the obligations the manufacturer has, I don't know what they are but leaving a product that you know to be unsafe with any user would I'd have thought left them liable.
I don't know if it's me you take offence to or you just have difficulty understanding my posts.
I thought saying "Normally it would be the retailer's obligation ... it's complicated by you not being the original purchaser" was pretty clear

[531colin]

Here's a thing.
A local retailer with an internet site used to buy some well-known stuff of European manufacture direct, at a price that was good for both the retailer and their end customers. Now, that UK retailer will be obliged to buy through a wholesaler/distributor, at a price not very different from the retail price charged by a well-known European internet retailer. If 2 bike shops in the same town get together and decide to sell inner tubes for £5.50, thats retail price maintenance, and its illegal. But somebody who imports goods into the UK can pressure the manufacturer to stop an individual retailer importing direct, which prevents the UK customer getting the best price unless they buy on-line from Europe. How is that in the consumer's best interests?
We could, of course, regulate the whole supply chain in a similar way as we regulate the retailer/consumer transaction, but that would require us to take back control of our own country from a bunch of Johnny-foreigner bureaucrats with their snouts in the trough, and Tony and the welshman wouldn't like that, would they?
Strict liability through the whole supply chain......whats wrong with that?
If you want to sell your goods in Blighty, you will have to stand behind them and support the consumer, not hide behind one man and his dog making a precarious living selling bikes.

[Vorpal]

Normally it would be the retailer's obligation to put the defect right for their customer, replacing something that is such a bad match isn't doing that. However it's complicated by you not being the original purchaser, I can understand the manufacturer not wanting you riding round on a faulty product but I don't know what obligation they have to you. I'd go back to the shop and say you're not satisfied, see what they say.

It's not the retailer's obligation. It is the manufacturer's.

A manufacturer that manufacturers faulty goods for sale in the UK is responsible to repair or replace them, independent of the retailer, numbers of consumers who have purchased and used an item, or whether distribution was via 50 other countries.

When manufacturers issue product recall notices they are required to provide the distribution chain with notifications of the recall, state what the risk is to consumers, and arrange for the collection, repair, replacement, etc of faulty goods. No sales contract or proof of purchase is required.

The collection, repair replacement, etc. is *typically* through the retailers who sell the product, but it doesn't have to be, and that the retailer has sold something faulty does not create any obligation for the retailer unless they are negligent (e.g. re-sell goods that have been returned as faulty, sell a product that they have been informed is subject to recall, etc.)

That said, the manufacturers with the best reputations have reasonable control over the distribution and sales of their products, and use their retailers to help them inform customers, replace faulty products, etc.

Second and third hand sales make it harder for them to inform consumers that a part or product requires repair or replacement.

One reason to register a product, even if it is purchased used, is to be informed directly of product recalls and (sometimes) service bulletins.

[karlt]

Under the Sale of Goods Act, the responsibility is with the retailer, as that's who the customer purchasing from that retailer has a contract with. Of course, in this case, the second-hand purchaser has no contract with the original retailer so no contract exists, so one is reliant on the manufacturer's warranty. It's one of the advantages of buying from a dealer rather than privately, although with used goods it's a bit muddier, as obviously a used item is not going to be exactly the same as a new one. In this case, as far as I can see, the shop is under no obligation whatsoever to do anything, as no contract exists between the purchaser and that shop. They're certainly not going to be inclined to do more than the manufacturer is willing to offer them, because it's only going to cost them money. You could possibly hold the manufacturer's feet to the fire a bit and get them to replace the frame to match the replacement fork, but I'd not like to argue that one too heavily.

[Vorpal]

Sorry if my post wasn't completely clear. Product recalls are the manufacturer's liability because they under the greatest burden to provide a safe product.

The return of faulty goods where safety is not affected, falls under Sale of Goods and is the responsibility of the retailer. The retailer is under no obligation with regard to goods purchased elsewhere or secondhand.

Faults that affect the safety of a product, however remain the responsibility of the manufacturerer, independent from retailers. Therefore product recall programs (which are normally issued to reduce exposure to liability suits) are the responsibility of the manufacturerer, not the retailer.

[mattsccm]

Without all the possible legal stuff. 2nd hand bike? I suspect you have had very good service probably better than you deserved .( in the nicest possible way I mean)
I would be getting a quick paint job and a smug feeling that you had got a good deal for your original purchase price
Or sell the forks and buy some alloys to match.

[leeuk321]

Thanks for everyone's replies. I think everyone's generally in agreement to where the responsibility lies, and that it definitely doesn't lie with the bike shop. And just to be clear, I definitely don't feel that the bike shop is obligated to me in any way. I didn't buy the bike originally from them and they went above and beyond in diagnosing where the creaking sound was coming from, contacting the manufacturer and then fitting them. My only small qualm is that they didn't let me know at any point that the forks were different, even when they called to say that the forks had been fitted and my bike was ready. I suspect that the forks were a surprise to them, but since they probably had a legal responsibility to fit them - and also maybe the manufacturer had repossessed the original forks for legal reasons) - they had no choice but to fit them so they didn't want to encourage me disliking them by 'making a thing' about them. That's what I suspect, because thinking back they were a little sheepish when I collected and really 'sold' them to me saying they were carbon and that they'd spent hours finding the fault. Anyway, like I said that's my only small qualm with the bike shop.

If the bike shop gets nowhere with the manufacturer and says that they've done what they can do then I'm happy with their efforts and won't involve them further, whatever course of action I decide to take.

But like I said, I completely wouldn't mind if they were just a blank black or carbon colour. It's just the introduction of 3 different colours to my 3-colour bike scheme that's horrendous.

[Samuel D]

I think you’re being perfectly reasonable, and it’s not for you to worry about the wrongs of the industry and whether the manufacturer is exploiting the shop.

A solution is not obvious, though. If you kick up an enormous fuss with the shop they might (might) try to find a black fork somewhere, but it would be a harsh penalty for their lapse of judgement in thinking you might not care about the colour clash.

By the way, many people don’t have an aesthetic bone in their bodies and genuinely don’t understand concerns such as yours. It’s not always a case of their not caring because it’s not their bicycle. They don’t care with their own bicycles either! Often these people have arbitrary ideas about what a good bicycle should look like, which may mask their aesthetic ignorance, but the ideas have no cohesion or rigour or concern for elegance.

Depending on a few things, this £100 carbon fork in black may suit you. I have it and it seems high quality. You might be able to sell your wrongly coloured fork for £50 on Gumtree or similar. Maybe you could negotiate a deal with the bike shop to swap them and take the old one, as long as you pay them a little? Not ideal for anyone, but it may be as cheap as painting the fork and result in a better outcome.

[pete75]

Here's a thing.
A local retailer with an internet site used to buy some well-known stuff of European manufacture direct, at a price that was good for both the retailer and their end customers. Now, that UK retailer will be obliged to buy through a wholesaler/distributor, at a price not very different from the retail price charged by a well-known European internet retailer. If 2 bike shops in the same town get together and decide to sell inner tubes for £5.50, thats retail price maintenance, and its illegal. But somebody who imports goods into the UK can pressure the manufacturer to stop an individual retailer importing direct, which prevents the UK customer getting the best price unless they buy on-line from Europe. How is that in the consumer's best interests?
We could, of course, regulate the whole supply chain in a similar way as we regulate the retailer/consumer transaction, but that would require us to take back control of our own country from a bunch of Johnny-foreigner bureaucrats with their snouts in the trough, and Princess Tony and the whining welshman wouldn't like that, would they?
Strict liability through the whole supply chain......whats wrong with that?
If you want to sell your goods in Blighty, you will have to stand behind them and support the consumer, not hide behind one man and his dog making a precarious living selling bikes.

What you describe in your first paragraph is likely illegal under EU law. A few years ago when cars were much, much cheaper in many European countries people were ordering British spec cars from European dealers. Various manufacturers started refusing to supply under pressure from UK distributors. VW and others were fined heavily by EU regulators and made to supply UK spec cars to any EU dealer who ordered them.

Regulation of the whole supply chain? Is that likely? The Brexiters by and large and large are fairly right of centre and more inclined to support big business rather than consumers/small business. They also want less regulation not more.
Isn't there a contractual obligation anyway between retailer and their supplier i.e. retailer refunds a customer he supplies with faulty goods and then whoever supplied retailer refunds him for the faulty goods.

As for the OP in my opinion he got good service from the bike shop who had no contractual obligation to fix his problem for free. If anyone is liable for the change in colour scheme it's the manufacturer who supplied the replacement forks.

[Bicycler]

Secondhand bike = no contract

thats not complicated at all, its very simple.

In this case Colin's correct, but just to clarify what he's saying because someone might misinterpret it as applying to all secondhand bike sales. The original retailer's 'contract' is with the person they sell the bike to, regardless of whether it is new or second hand. If the product is sold on by the original purchaser (as here) the original shop doesn't have any duty towards the new customer. Where a retailer sells a secondhand bike they are responsible to the customer they sell to for the product they sold just as they are for new bikes.

[Zanda]

I'd paint the fork black.

[pete75]

It’s not always a case of their not caring because it’s not their bicycle. They don’t care with their own bicycles either! Often these people have arbitrary ideas about what a good bicycle should look like, which may mask their aesthetic ignorance, but the ideas have no cohesion or rigour or concern for elegance.

Many people buy and/or build bikes out of concern for function and what they'll be used for not for appearance. Surly LHT, VSF TX400 or Thorn Raven are not aesthetically pleasing and are not meant to be. They're designed to be tough and stand the rigours of long distance , heavily laden touring though some of us see a certain beauty in their functionality.

[Brucey]

Secondhand bike = no contract

thats not complicated at all, its very simple.

In this case Colin's correct, but just to clarify what he's saying because someone might misinterpret it as applying to all secondhand bike sales. The original retailer's 'contract' is with the person they sell the bike to, regardless of whether it is new or second hand. If the product is sold on by the original purchaser (as here) the original shop doesn't have any duty towards the new customer. Where a retailer sells a secondhand bike they are responsible to the customer they sell to for the product they sold just as they are for new bikes.

In this case the OP says he put the bike into the dealers for servicing, so they have a contract to service the bike. Part of the remit of such a service is usually to make the bike safe if it is a simple problem, or at least report to the customer that there is a more serious problem and consult with them before rectifying it, at least because there are usually cost implications.

In this case the old fork was defective (perhaps even dangerous if it was creaking...) and the replacement cost nothing, so for them it was a no-brainer. Yes they should probably have consulted the OP before they did, but they may not have known about the colour change themselves until the forks actually turned up.

Dealers who carry out warranty/recall frame/fork replacements are in a cleft stick really; they are obliged to do the work but someone has to carry the overhead of time to organise the replacement and then the labour required to strip down and build the bike back up again. In theory the manufacturer expects the customer to carry the rebuild labour cost ( !) but in reality the customer may be reluctant to do so and the dealer may be reluctant to charge for it at the full rate anyway. The net result is that the customer can get substandard service if the rebuild is hurried and the dealer has a loss on the labour change to contend with. No -one wins!

If it were me I'd just paint the new fork, or cover the wrong coloured parts with stick-on vinyl decals or something.

cheers

[Graham]

Lee,

Please try to post up a picture of this monster bike.
( If posting here - Use a photo editor to scale it down to 480 pixels wide approx, to get the file size below the 256Kb limit ).

Otherwise upload it to some other photo website and post the link.

PS. I quite like the idea of completely dissonant colours

[Si]

If they'd changed my old cheaper steel* fork for a swanky expensive carbon one then I'd sell the carbon one and buy a compatible steel one**, plus a bag of chips and some brown beer with the change.


* as all my road bikes have steel forks....not sure if I'd have a frame with an Alu one in the first place, but then I'm a snob***
** assuming I could find one in good condition second hand.
*** actually I tell a lie as my work bike has an Alu fork, but then that belongs to work not to me.