Bigtwin
Guest
Le singe said:
Read the letter again - all it does is completely reject any liability, and fobs off with an offer to get someone else to sort it at the owner's expense.
All this is irrelevent - the claim is against the dealer.
REMUS and Performance Parts website!
- Thread starter mike wright
- Start date
Read the letter again - all it does is completely reject any liability, and fobs off with an offer to get someone else to sort it at the owner's expense.
All this is irrelevent - the claim is against the dealer.
Le singe
Guest
I've read the letter again, it still clearly states that the engineer will investigate the original cause of the failure.
Pre-supposing that it is a faulty product, how would the agreement of a qualified third-party not help your case?
Pre-supposing that it is a faulty product, how would the agreement of a qualified third-party not help your case?
roddy
Registered user
I may have this wrong,
but I always thought the responsibility was on the company you bought the product from to prove that the product was out of it's warrenty period ?, not you to prove it was still within it ?
Also is there not a claim under a "fit for purpose" type of law I wouldn't imagine that a exhaust that last less than 13 months isn't fit for the purpose it was bought for, on the assumtion it was fitted correctly.
If nothing else comes out of this then I have at least learnt to keep all my receipts, it would seem to make life easier.
and on a side note I don't think the personnal attacks help anybody so what the point.
cheers
but I always thought the responsibility was on the company you bought the product from to prove that the product was out of it's warrenty period ?, not you to prove it was still within it ?
Also is there not a claim under a "fit for purpose" type of law I wouldn't imagine that a exhaust that last less than 13 months isn't fit for the purpose it was bought for, on the assumtion it was fitted correctly.
If nothing else comes out of this then I have at least learnt to keep all my receipts, it would seem to make life easier.
and on a side note I don't think the personnal attacks help anybody so what the point.
cheers
Bigtwin
Guest
Le singe said:I've read the letter again, it still clearly states that the engineer will investigate the original cause of the failure.
Pre-supposing that it is a faulty product, how would the agreement of a qualified third-party not help your case?
I'll say it yet again.
The manufacturer has flatly denied the claim in all forms, but a load of smoke and mirrors about other people's warrenties and other utterly irrelevant waffle. There is a complete avoidance of the real issue, which is the statutory duty on the manufacturer; this is non-voidable. All they are doing is offering to put the buyer in contact with a commercial mender, who will fix at buyers expense. I wonder why they are keen to provide a name for the buyer to use eh? I wonder if, by change, they would attribute the cause to exactly what the rest of that paragraph says, in exchange for all Remu's referrals? If one was a cynic....
This is a classic waffle and avoid letter - seem dozens and dozens of them. And they work, as can be seen from the reaction of lots of people here.
The claim is against the dealer, who has to provide goods FFP and of SQ. An exhaust packing up after 13 months from new is not good enough. Nothing to do with receipts of original purchase or any of that nonsense. The letter even says that if the receipt is found, they still won't cover the product.
Bigtwin said:
I`d agree..........IF IT WAS A ROAD SILENCER.
The faulty one concerned was a RACE SILENCER.
The road silencers come with a two year warranty.
The race silencers come with a ONE year warranty.
Thirteen months is outside one year....but it would seem likely that any retailer would show goodwill at that early stage and consider a valid claim.
However,goodwill relies on someone being polite,courteous and not ranting .
Once someone starts ranting and bad mouthing people,it goes by the book.....
The only way of establishing the age is by seeing the date of purchase.
The date of purchase is on the receipt.
The receipt is not available.
You lose.
Fit For Purpose arguments are bollocks in this case,as a RACE silencer was being used on the ROAD......race silencers aren`t as durable as road ones.
Hence the shorter warranty.
Bigtwin
Guest
tarka said:
I know you won't have it and simply won't listen, but the legal fact of the matter is you are wrong. It's NOT a question of warranty, it's a question of Statutory Rights, and it has NOTHING to do with the manufacturer, THE CLAIM IS AGAINST THE DEALER and 13 months IS NOT FFP or of SQ when being sold by a dealer for road use. Period.
None so deaf as those who won't hear.
Le singe
Guest
Tarka is 100% correct, the product was not being put to the use it was designed for.
Why don't you pursue the claim for the owner, it will be interesting to hear the outcome.
Why don't you pursue the claim for the owner, it will be interesting to hear the outcome.
Bigtwin
Guest
Le singe said:
FFS - which bit don't you understand?
It's irrelevant - THE CLAIM IS AGAINST THE DEALER. The bike has to be FFP - the dealer sold it as a road bike. It has to be fit for road use, with all that entails. Dealers are NOT allowed to just go selling bikes that fall apart - is they do, you have a come-back. It's really very simple. You said yourself - it's the wrong can - Q.E.D.
You may not like the compainant's attitude - tough - the law doesn't care - he has the same rights as anyone else.
Schnell Panzer
Guest
Bigtwin wants to make the point that the claim is with the dealer and is correct in doing so, as they sold a road bike with a race can. If the dealer didn't fit said "Can" then perhaps they should have removed it before selling the bike rather than relying on the honesty of the seller.
However, this thread started as an attack on Remus / Performance Parts when in fact they haven't done anything wrong, other than offer some support in putting it right.
However, this thread started as an attack on Remus / Performance Parts when in fact they haven't done anything wrong, other than offer some support in putting it right.
Schnell Panzer is quite correct on both counts....
There`s been two different issues going on in this Thread.
I (and others) have been responding to Mike Wright`s dealing with the Remus manufacturer and supplier.
BigTwin has been stating that the issue is with the Dealer,but due to an element of 'rant',the main content of his post has been overlooked.....
That being the bike was actually ILLEGALLY SOLD FOR ROAD USE WITH A RACE SILENCER FITTED.
From this perspective,BigTwin was totally correct.
As has been stated above,though....the Thread is about the comments and actions of the Race Silencer supplier and Mike Wright.
So....we`re all correct,really.
Mike just needs to sort out his problem.....and although it now looks that the first point of action must be to inform the Dealer that THE BIKE wasn`t 'FFP', being technically illegal and thus unsuitable for road use due to the race silencer,bear in mind that it is only illegal if marked as NOT FOR ROAD USE / RACE ONLY ,etc, or deemed excessively loud by an MOT Tester.
If it isn`t marked as such,and not deemed too loud by a tester,then it`s kind of Catch 22 and back to the start of the Thread,really..........
There`s been two different issues going on in this Thread.
I (and others) have been responding to Mike Wright`s dealing with the Remus manufacturer and supplier.
BigTwin has been stating that the issue is with the Dealer,but due to an element of 'rant',the main content of his post has been overlooked.....
That being the bike was actually ILLEGALLY SOLD FOR ROAD USE WITH A RACE SILENCER FITTED.
From this perspective,BigTwin was totally correct.
As has been stated above,though....the Thread is about the comments and actions of the Race Silencer supplier and Mike Wright.
So....we`re all correct,really.
Mike just needs to sort out his problem.....and although it now looks that the first point of action must be to inform the Dealer that THE BIKE wasn`t 'FFP', being technically illegal and thus unsuitable for road use due to the race silencer,bear in mind that it is only illegal if marked as NOT FOR ROAD USE / RACE ONLY ,etc, or deemed excessively loud by an MOT Tester.
If it isn`t marked as such,and not deemed too loud by a tester,then it`s kind of Catch 22 and back to the start of the Thread,really..........
cral
Registered user
when i worked for gay excess we did quite a lot of dealing with performance parts, and they were, and i would imagine still are, one of the better companies in the motorcycle accessories field. always fair, and treated all problems as best as could be expected.
i would say that the best thing to do in any case were you find yourself feeling a little shat upon is to speak to the trading standards office. its what they are for.
they would have told you that you complaint is with the dealer you bought the bike / or the can from not the importer.
the dealer should be named and shamed here not pp.
so ring trading standards, then ring the dealer and tell him you have spoken to them, they will tell you were you stand , have a pen to right down what they say and quote the lot back at the said dealer, he will then shit himself and sort out your problems. if not, you take him to the small claims court, it will cost you bugger all and the dealer will be found at fault. problem solved
once thats all clear, write to pp saying how very sorry you are for giving them a rough time and then we will all be happy
i would say that the best thing to do in any case were you find yourself feeling a little shat upon is to speak to the trading standards office. its what they are for.
they would have told you that you complaint is with the dealer you bought the bike / or the can from not the importer.
the dealer should be named and shamed here not pp.
so ring trading standards, then ring the dealer and tell him you have spoken to them, they will tell you were you stand , have a pen to right down what they say and quote the lot back at the said dealer, he will then shit himself and sort out your problems. if not, you take him to the small claims court, it will cost you bugger all and the dealer will be found at fault. problem solved
once thats all clear, write to pp saying how very sorry you are for giving them a rough time and then we will all be happy
Vendome 41
Registered user
A lot of equipement is illegal to use on the road but legal to be sold as I would presume the responsability is likely to be with user rather than seller (blue light for bonnets etc) can be sold freely but should not be use....
Bigtwin
Guest
Vendome 41 said:
No. It's with the seller, unless the specific "defect" in legality was made clear to, and accepted by, the buyer.
About the one good thing Vines have done re me was make my fit a road legal can on my 1100 before trade-in, on the grounds they they couldn't sell it on with a non-road one.
JimmyT
Guest
remus and performance parts
I purched a titanium can for my GSA.Well chuffed with it untill it caused melt down on various parts on my bike.I took it up with performance parts by phone{got nowhere]Then again et the NEC bike show.I ended up wanting to thump the ignorant twat I spoke to.Luckily Mike told me to calm down and leave it.I would never deal wth performance parts again!
I purched a titanium can for my GSA.Well chuffed with it untill it caused melt down on various parts on my bike.I took it up with performance parts by phone{got nowhere]Then again et the NEC bike show.I ended up wanting to thump the ignorant twat I spoke to.Luckily Mike told me to calm down and leave it.I would never deal wth performance parts again!
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2003
- Messages
- 31,783
- Reaction score
- 21,478
Another old thread
I'm guessing but probably the indicator and or numberplate
I'm guessing but probably the indicator and or numberplate
