No, it comes down to reading the instructions, if the tool is used correctly it works, abuse it and you should expect it to fail - just how many 'user scenarios' should the designer take into consideration, any tool will fail if abused.
So I took it back this morning. First thing I got asked was "What were you using it for?"
'Slabs.'
"Well, you know these are not made for cutting slabs, they are only for metal, that's why they come supplied with a metal disc"
Then why did you sell me 5 masonry discs (on the same receipt) when I bought it?
"Well they are only meant for light use, OK, I'll swap it for another one."
As I didnt want another, I had the choice of either getting other goods to the value, or a credit note, as "without the box, we cannot give a cash refund" I didnt push it, as I needed some other stuff, so got those bits instead. Then stopped off at Screwfix on the way home and bought the Dewalt. Alan.
That's all very well and of course one should read the instructions. Equally, would there have been anything on the outside of the box before purchase pointing out that the product can only be run in short bursts? Doesn't seem likely.
It is reasonable for a user and a designer to assume that a large angle grinder would be used for cutting a lot of paving slabs, possibly in quick succession.
It is further reasonable for a customer to assume that if a product can potentially have an overheating issue that it should protect itself and not become irreparable damaged.
It isn't as if these are corner cases - they are the main purpose for purchase.
One wouldn't buy one of these for denistry for example, unless one were a vet at the zoo. Those might be considered to be unreasonable "user scenarios". Using it for its main intended purpose is not.
The reality is that it has been engineered down to a price on the hope that the user will hardly use the thing. The supplier has been caught out and should pay.
Sensible outcome.
Equally, requiring packaging back is bollocks. If you were returning something as unwanted and unused (e.g. within Distance Selling Regulations) then it needs to be in resaleable condition and that would mean having the box.
However a return for a fault could happen at any time, and then either it's repair or replace. Neither need the box.
I'm sure you don't keep the box of everything you buy just in case, any more than anybody else.
Whilst you are correct that the tool has been engineered down to a price, you're well and truly wrong that either the supplier or manufacturer should pay for the customer abusing the tool - a refund should be given on the unused tool if, upon getting the tool home and reading the instructions [1], the tool is not fit for the intended use but if the purchaser ignores the instructions why the f**k should someone else pay for their stupidity?!
[1] assuming that it's not clear from the outside of the box.
You don't know what the reality is but, If Machine Mart were to conduct their business on that basis, I'm sure they would have gone bust by now. Maybe there's a Friday afternoon problem in the Chinese assembly plant.
Yes indeed. It seems to be generally accepted that these cheapo machines will only work for a few hours - if that - before giving up. The suppliers rely on the average punter using them for *less* than their design life during the warranty period. At the same time, their business model must surely take account of the fact that a small percentage of purchasers *will* drive them to destruction - so that the cost of refunding or replacing a few machines is factored into the calculations.
The customer is not abusing the tool.
If you're going to run that line of argument, you might as well say that if one buys a car and it says in the small print of the instructions not to start the engine and one does, then that's abusing it.
In the context of the instructions, it would be,
In the context of expected reasonable use, that would be as much of a nonsense as saying that an angle grinder can't be used for the reasonably expected purpose of cutting slabs to make a drive or patio in a normal project.
The manufacturer is misrepresenting the fitness for purpose of the tool. If I buy a car, I don't expect to find a comment that I can't start the engine. If I buy an angle grinder, then I expect it to be able to do a proper job and to have a running time suitable for a typical project in which it would be used.
As an absolute minimum, I would expect it not to overheat and break if it gets too warm.
Whatever. If the product is faulty or not fit for purpose (those are the only choices), then the retailer gives a refund. That's it. The story about needing packaging is total bollocks. They can't sell it again anyway.
This is a prima facie case of retailer refunds or has an appointment in the court.
I have a Wickes jobby which cost me £45 about three years ago, done a fair amount of work & is still going strong. Soft start, three position 'D' handle & side handle. Can't fault it,
How about if you buy a car, refuse to read the manual and don't have it serviced every 5k miles like it says in the manual? Thats abuse.
If the manual says don't run the tool for more than 10 minutes in every 30 minutes and you run it for 5 hours then that is abuse whatever you say.
Do you disregard the maintence info in the manual too?
I expect it to break if it gets too warm.. after all that would be the definition of too warm wouldn't it?
They are if they are trying to do something the tool was not designed to do, if the grinder is only designed to cut tin foil yet the owner tries to cut 50mm plate-steel (even though the tools limitations are clearly indicated in the tools manual/instructions/on the packaging) the tool is not faulty, it's been abused - IOW it's no more faulty than a damaged screw-driver that has been (miss)used as a pry-bar or chisel.
Well if you rev the engine beyond the maximum RPM indicated in the manual who's fault would that be?...
Oh right, so just because a Smart car has wheels like a lorry does the Smart car should be capable of carrying the same load as a lorry, and when the owner snaps the chassis the manufacturer should pay for a new car because they didn't make the chassis strong enough - if you want to carry a heavy load buy a van or lorry - IOW it's reasonable to expect the tool (or what ever) to do what the spec' says, not what you think, hope or wish it would.
Andy Hall, the only person who would buy a Robin Reliant and expect a Lotus - "but they both have wheels, they're both made out of GRP, they both have an engine, they both have a chassis"...
...and returning to the OP's problem, how do we know if that is not what has happened, a heat activated fusible link could well have gone open-circuit to protect the motor and casing?
Except that the packaging might be the quickest / easiest way to prove that the tool is in fact what the 'customer' claims, having a receipt only prove a purchase, not that the product presented came from that retailer.
Not if the retailer can show that the tool has been miss-used.
To which you would have to draw their attention to the description they give for the product:
"Powerful & robust, the Clarke CAG232 9" angle grinder offers unbeatable value for money for trade & DIY users. It's ideal for numerous grinding & cutting tasks in ferrous & non-ferrous metals, brick, blocks & masonry too (with appropriate blade or disc). The CAG232's feature's include a rear handle that rotates 90° left & right for comfortable & efficient use and spindle lock for easy disc change."
Their description of "trade & DIY" would refute that.
Fair enough... I think I would be tempted to send an email the web operation suggesting in light of the "advice" you received from the shop (naming the branch of course), they ought to change the product description!
Let us know how they compare in use.
I beg your pardon, you are more anti-deluvian than me!
I bought my wife a new Peugeot earlier this year. The guidebook advised a first service at 20,000 miles ( yes, miles). The car is full of electronic gubbins, one of which says that the first service is at
12,000 miles (or 2 years).I checked with Peugeot UK who advise that go with what the car tells you. No service from purchase until 2 years or in our case 12,000 miles!
I had incredible difficulty believing this, expecting the first service to be at 1,500 or at best 5,000 miles!
Seems things have changed.
If I could just get to the Stannah! ;)
Seems like a moot point in this case. Having read the sales blurb for the tool in question it is supposed to be suitable for both trade use and masonry cutting.
Somehow I can't visualise that one....
How about if you have a car and it says in the manual in the small print after you have bought it that you can only drive it for ten minutes and than you have to stop by the side of the road to let it cool down for half an hour?
That wouldn't really be tenable on the part of the manufacturer would it? The expectation of the customer is to be able to drive it all day apart from filling it and him with fuel.
One doesn't even see Skodas parked by the side of the motorway for this purpose.
Even more to the point, if one had bought such a car and the engine irrevocably broke after a day, even when the car was driven within the speed limit and in the right gear, then it would be reasonable to expect a replacement.
The point is about expected use for the type of tool. An angle grinder should be able to run for more than 10 mins in 30, instructions or no instructions. That is not to say that one shouldn't follow the instructions, but that this is not a reasonable pattern of use.
Certainly, if the reason for this is that the motor will overheat, then there should be a thermal cutout to prevent damage. It is perfectly possible to do this. The reason why it isn't is that it adds to the manufacturing cost. This only compounds the felony in terms of the product's lack of fitness for purpose.
Of course not. That is a different issue. Maintenance is part of the normal expectation of the care of a tool. Presumably the manufacturer has a complete range of spares in order to facilitate this.
Then you have a low expectation. I would expect it to protect itself. It is perfectly easy and reasonable to achieve that. The issue is cost.
Umm.... I think that if somebody buys a 230mm angle grinder, it is reasonable to expect it to be able to cut paving slabs.
If it can't, that should be clearly indicated in the product description advertised and the packaging. Certainly one shouldn't need to look in the manual *before* buying because that normally would not be out on display with the product. It might be in the box, but then retailers don't normally appreciate people opening boxes before buying in case the box gets ripped and they end up with unsaleable stock.
Moreover, in the product description for the Clarke angle grinder it says
"Powerful & robust, the Clarke CAG232 9" angle grinder offers unbeatable value for money for trade & DIY users. It's ideal for numerous grinding & cutting tasks in ferrous & non-ferrous metals, brick, blocks & masonry too (with appropriate blade or disc). The CAG232's feature's include a rear handle that rotates 90° left & right for comfortable & efficient use and spindle lock for easy disc change."
Nothing about light use (says trade) and specifically says that it's suitable for masonry. It doesn't say anything about intermittent use.
Irrelevant. That restriction is true for any car. There is a red patch on the RPM indicator and cars can have a means to prevent damage if a safe level is exceeded.
That's nonsense. It's obvious visually that a SMART is a shopping car suitable for parking sideways if you want and that a 32 tonne lorry is intended for rather more substantial work.
If you look at Machine Mart's range of 230mm angle grinders, they look visually similar. When even the cheapest one says that it's suitable for trade use and specifically says that it can cut masonry as well as not mentioning intermittent use, it hasn't been designed and manufactured properly and isn't fit for purpose.
The retailer could easily have mentioned all of these shortcomings in the product description and chose not to, for obvious reasons of making the product appear less attractive. I don't suppose that they mentioned this at time of purchase either and certainly sold some masonry cutting disks with it.
It's not acceptable that the purchaser would only discover this when he got the product home.
In effect, they are gambling that the user will only use the product intermittently and that nothing bad would happen. They have also failed to be completely open about the limitations of the product before purchase.
That adds up to a refund.
It could be. Does the supplier have a full range of spares and a repair service?
Since it is still presumably ( a few days later) a current item, it would be possible for the store to go and take a look at another box.
That's a very thin argument anyway, because their web site description does not mention the limitations of the product vis-a-vis intermittent use and represents it as being suitable for trade use and cutting masonry.
When the customer takes it back they claim that it's not suitable for masonry because it's only sold with metal cutting discs. That makes the misrepresentation aspect even worse.
The retailer should have indicated the limitations clearly before purchase.
Now you really are entering the realms of fantasy.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.