In the UK we are fortunate in that we live in a “free” society where every individual has “rights” which he/she can freely exercise without fear of prosecution. Many of the “rights” to which we refer are simply taken for granted as part of everyday life and it is only when we come up against some obstacle preventing the continuance of our routine activities that we need not refer to rules governing any one of those rights.
Timber Composite Doors follows the same philosophy as all of the GFD Group of companies in that we are as transparent as we possibly can be with both our in house activities and with our relationships with all of our customers. We do not expect our clients to pay us if our goods or services are substandard, our policy is to repair or replace until the customer is happy, we do not want to have anything but satisfied customers. We also expect our customers to be equally as fair with ourselves; we do not expect “frivolous” claims for damage or delayed payments for unreasonable demands. We consider a two way trust to be the very essence of good customer relationships
The GFD Group has an excellent Customer Services record, a one of which we are justifiably proud and would wish to retain, if our customers are in any doubt we always direct them to our independent TRUST PILOT testimonials where the words of our customers speak far louder than any that we could write.
In our industry the manner in which we trade with our customers is governed by the Sale of Goods Act which has worked exceedingly well since its introduction in 1979 – if you need to know more check out the “Which” magazine guide;
But, the rules may soon be about to change “The Consumer Rights Bill” was laid before Parliament in January of this year and may well pass into law by the end of the year. At GFD Group we do not consider that this new Bill will have any impact upon our relationships with our customers as our current trading philosophy falls well within the rules of any new legislation, but it may not be the same for all within our industry.
The key issues of this draft bill relate to the “consumers” rights to reject goods which are considered faulty or defective, a tightening of some of the Rules as they previously applied to the Sale of Goods Act and relate in principle to two aspects – the timing of the rejection and the specification of the goods.
The Specification issue will prove a considerably more thorny issue for many, whereas GFD Group provide a single product of predefined if variable specification, colour, glazing, accessories etc it remains a singular product – a door. The problem in this new legislative draft occurs where the consumer purchase comprises multiple units of a particular bespoke specification, for example ten windows for a property the current drafting of this bill allows the consumer who finds one of the ten units at fault to reject the full shipment. The GGF (Glass and Glazing Federation) a respected voice in the industry has taken up the challenge on behalf of the fenestration industry requesting that the legislators reconsider certain aspects of their proposals, for more information see.
We at the GFD Group welcome any legislation that benefits both client and customer but there are clearly aspects of this legislation that require further scrutiny – how major or minimum does a defect have to be to warrant a replacement or a refund when a repair is a viable alternative, what if the client simply changes their mind and decides they do not like the installed unit and wants an alternative – who decides? The value of any installed goods when removed is Nil, which can be a heavy financial burden to the manufacturer, particularly, if the goods are rejected for a minor defect when a repair or replacement part would have rendered the installed goods 100% effective. Unfortunately as with all legislation there will be winners and losers, honest manufacturers, resellers and consumers will continue to satisfactorily conclude sales (and we consider ourselves in this category at GFD Group) but there will always be those on both sides who will interpret the rules to their individual benefit where the only winners in such circumstances will be the legal profession in sorting the problems arising out of poor legislation.