About Overclockers UK's returns policy
======================================

Overclockers are a firm which sell computers and components, mostly aimed
at videogamers. Like most box shifters, they're OK until you get a
defective part, and then comedy ensues. The situation is exacerbated by
the way they have an 0871 number, so you pay for the privilege of sorting
out their errors and they have zero incentive to get it right without
being chased.

I bought a motherboard and some memory from them. Memory is often sold
these days in "kits" of two modules; one module works, but two works at
twice the bandwidth, so the memory is routinely supplied, installed... and
returned to the vendor in pairs. One of the modules in my kit was
defective.

There's no doubt it was defective; in three separate machines with
different models of motherboard, it caused the machine to emit the "I've
got no memory" beeps for that motherboard. However, fair enough, OCUK
can't just take my word for it; so I return the part to them, they test
it, and they send me a replacement, right?

Wrong. As I discover on the phone - first 0871-rate phonecall - they want
you to wait 28 days while it is returned to the manufacturer. (All else
aside, you might reasonably be wondering if a defective memory module with
an effective retail price of L13.50 is in fact going to be shipped back to
Taiwan to be carefully examined and repaired.) They will tell you this is
entirely in accordance with the Sale of Goods Act. It's not.

After a bit of a think, I call the credit card company to request a
chargeback. As soon as I mention it's Overclockers, the chap on the phone
knows who I'm talking about; he's heard of them often before. Curious,
that. They will post me the paperwork for the chargeback.

I write a letter pointing out, well:
  (2)If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods, the
  seller must - 
  (a)repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable
  time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;
  (b)bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular
  the cost of any labour, materials or postage). 
That's section 48B(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979, just in case you are
writing a similar letter to some intransigent vendor of computer parts
yourself.

Since they have plenty of replacement parts in stock, and this is a cheap
bulk-buy part (so if they do get a replacement from the manufacturer not a
refund (ho, ho), they'll be able to sell that easily), 28 days is not a
reasonable time; because they insist the entire kit be returned, it'll
clearly cause me significant inconvenience (the machine can limp on with
one working module, but remove both to send them back, and effectively
I'll have to buy more memory, rendering repair or replacement on such a
long timespan useless).

So, says my letter, shall I fill out the chargeback form, or will they
give me a refund, or will they agree to dispatch a replacement on the next
working day? On talking to friends, more than one of them has had problems
with Overclockers, and on each occasion they were first obdurate but
immediately caved when the customer refused to give in, so I was
cautiously optimistic.

Sure enough, on Monday a person who we shall call J rings. Of course they
will send a replacement immediately, even though they are apparently under
the same misapprehension about the Sale of Goods Act. Have they not read
my letter, not understood it, or perhaps it will turn out everyone from
Overclockers mysteriously seems to labour under the same misapprehension,
almost as if it represents a policy from on high?

I send it off a few days later, before I go on holiday for 2 weeks.
Presumably by the time I get back it will have arrived? You probably know
the answer by now.

So, second 0871-rate phonecall - and this time as a direct result of
Overclockers' failure to stick to the agreement they have made. The same
fallacy about the Sale of Goods Act; the person I speak to, who is not J,
has not and cannot read my letter. So, I ask, will they send me a
replacement today, or shall I continue with the chargeback? If I do the
latter, they say, they'll take me to court (a laughable threat), but since
J agreed to send me the part as a goodwill gesture (wrong, J presumably
agreed to send me the part because the law is on my side and I clearly
knew it) they'll send it out today.

So, what's the lesson? My advice is - well, don't use Overclockers.
Failing that, if they try to push you around, refer to the Act, write them
a letter, and remember that you may have to check that they actually
follow up on any promise they make - and that a second-class stamp may
well be cheaper than phoning them.