MANUFACTURERS GARANTEES

[silverlink]

Perhaps someone on here may be able to throw some light on the subject of manufacturers guarantees.

A while ago I purchased a new Bachmann Robinson 04 from a major retailer with the intention of fitting it with a Loksound 21pin decoder. I ran the loco first on a rolling road for a few minutes in each direction where it performed perfectly. I then, following the manufacturer’s instructions fitted the sound module. Once fitted I then put the loco on my programming track and using my Lenz 100 checked the loco to see if all was well. I found the loco had a major wiring fault which, if I had tried it on the running track it would have blown my decoder! As there was a fault somewhere I contacted the Retailer who sold me the decoder who informed me that he had other customers with this problem in fact some had blown their decoders when they had put them on the running rails. At £100 a go this is a major loss. I was then told that Bachmann will not cover the loss under guarantee as it is in their words ‘consequential loss’ I find this incredible as the fault lay in the dcc socket not the decoder where excess solder had run across two or more terminals that on dc are not affected but on dcc creates a major short. Bachmann say on the box ‘DCC Ready’ & even give you instructions on how to fit a decoder to said loco. Has anyone else suffered this problem?

Incidentally the retailer replaced my loco by return complete with a standard decoder as compensation even though I was lucky in not blowing my sound one.

silverlink

[kevinlms]

Once you had identified the source of the fault (solder run in the socket), why not just fix it, rather than send it back? I know you're entitled to a replacement loco as faulty, but would seem to me that if you have the skills to identify that sort of fault, then almost certainly you have the skills to fix it, then do so.

 

I think the solution to risking expensive decoders, is to try an entry level one fist & make sure it works OK, before risking your expensive ones. It would seem that, that is exactly what your retailer did.

 

Kevin Martin

[silverlink]

Kevin,

thanks for reply, I take on board what you say but will say this, the problem with the decoder socket was unrepairable as been a 21pin type it was inpossible to get in it to do anything about the solder. Unlike the 8 pin socket where the pins are accessible the 21 pin was much more difficult to fix & if I'd cocked it up I wouldn't have been able to send it back to the retailer. At the time I didn't know what the cause of the problem was & it was the retailer who supplied the sound module who told me what was wrong. I understand from him that he found other 04's with wires soldered to the wrong terminals!

With regards using a cheap decoder first yes, I suppose I could but as I have a fair amount of experence with decoder fitting I always do a test on my progamming track first to make sure all is well. If there is a problem the Lenz tells me and shuts the system down therefore protecting the decoder.

The reason for the post was to see if anyone out there could give any legal way of getting a refund for those who have lost decoders due to faulty workmanship.

cheers

silverlink

[HLT 0109]

I see no reason why OP should fix the problem himself. Nor do I see why the retailer of the decoder has any responsibility to recompense. In trying to remedy a defect oneself, one risks causing worse damage. Anyone doing what OP did and suffering consequential loss would have, I believe, a right to be reimbursed for the consequential loss by the retailer of the loco who has supplied goods not fit for purpose. That right arises under statute and not under the manufacturer's guarantee (or warranty). The manufacturer's warranty is in addition to one's statutory rights and not in substitution for them. The retialer would then have a right to claim against the manufacturer - again under statute rather than the warranty. OP seems to have done the right thing vis-a-vis the retailer of the loco and has also had a bonus from the supplier of the decoder.

 

I have found Bachmann's comments about their warranties to be rather - shall I say - defensive but, when presented with a problem they have always been helpful.

[spamcan61]

Returning to the OP's fundamental point, this DTI guide to SOGA & suchlike for traders specifically mentions consequential loss, so I suspect that punters with a dead sound chip would stand some chance of a claim, although against the retailer (whom their contract is with) not the manufacturer, in the first instance at least.

 

http://www.bis.gov.u...s/file25486.pdf

 

page 18.

 

"When a buyer suffers loss as a direct

consequence of a faulty product, the buyer

may be able to claim damages."

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

It would be interesting to see such a consequential loss claim. Since the OP did the decoder install in the recommended way, by first testing the newly installed decoder on programme track which protects the decoder from destruction by limiting the current, there is no need for any decoder installation to cause a loss in this way.

 

If I were the supplier of the goods I would argue that there is well established good practise universally recommended by DCC system manufacturers that the decoder be tested after installation on programme track, and not given normal track power until an address has been successfully loaded, confirming successful install. It is all in the hands of the customer who has decided to install a decoder, and equally protects the customer from his own errors, so is always best practise. If the customer chooses to put the newly installed decoder untested on DCC track power, he should bear any consequences.

[Andy Y]

Can I first of all check if this was a GWR ROD or an LNER O4? The issue with the former is referenced here - http://www.rmweb.co....-rod-dcc-issue/ but I understand that may either be irrelevant or not been available at the time.

 

Manufacturers warranties obviously apply to a product as supplied ad is referenced on Bachmann's site at http://www.Bachmann....ice/service.php

 

The advice given with respect to decoders on there is as follows:

 

Digital Chips

With the use of Digital circuitry becoming commonplace, we are finding products being forwarded for repair with Digital Chips installed. The fragile nature of these items means that they are susceptible to damage.

 

[/left]

Please note Any locomotive returned to the Service Department for attention should, if possible, have any decoder removed: if sent with decoder, service may be restricted. Bachmann Europe plc will only accept liability to the value of a standard model: this applies too to body modifications/detailing.

 

[/left]

 

We will not be responsible for any loss or damage to any DCC items sent into us, and they are likely to be returned to the sender with no action having been taken.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that it's specifically applicable to this case other than that noted in red.but it's there as notes for other readers.

 

As Spamcan rightly points out your contract is with the retailer and that is relevant if there is any consequential loss. It would then be for the retailer to take up with the manufacturer.

 

As such the consequential loss issue is outside the scope of a manufacturer's guarantee.

 

I have spoken to Bachmann and they acknowledge the ROD issue as linked above but have not come across any similar issue with other O4 products. They are keen to hear if the problem was not on a ROD though so appropriate steps can be considered.

[Adrian Wintle]

[Devil's advocate mode]

If you manage to blow a decoder because you installed it and then put it directly on the main track without testing it first on a programming track, it could be argued that you didn't follow proper installation procedures (i.e. testing at low current), and therefore you are liable for the loss of the decoder.

[/Devil's advocate mode]

 

Adrian

[spamcan61]

[Devil's advocate mode]

If you manage to blow a decoder because you installed it and then put it directly on the main track without testing it first on a programming track, it could be argued that you didn't follow proper installation procedures (i.e. testing at low current), and therefore you are liable for the loss of the decoder.

[/Devil's advocate mode]

 

Adrian

 

If the instructions provided with the 'DCC ready' locomotive tell you to do that Ithen I see your point - although a faulty loco is still a faulty loco - , if they don't; I don't.

[craigwelsh]

[Devil's advocate mode]

If you manage to blow a decoder because you installed it and then put it directly on the main track without testing it first on a programming track, it could be argued that you didn't follow proper installation procedures (i.e. testing at low current), and therefore you are liable for the loss of the decoder.

[/Devil's advocate mode]

 

Adrian

Whilst I agree about the use of a programming track its not possible with some systems such as the EZ Vommand and basic Dynamis sold by Bachmann.

[silverlink]

With reference to Andy's comments on thread 7 the loco in question was a BR version & not GWR. I understand from my Loksound retailer that mine wasn't a one off and that other customers as well as himself had suffered with this problem. I will see if I can get information from him on Bachmann's response to this problem when he contacted them. Luckily as I have a fair amount of experience with fitting decoders I didn't destroy a valuble decoder however I'm sure there will be many out there that have. I don't think the Bachmann instuctions that came with loco mentions checking the loco on the progamming track first before putting it on the main.

silverlink

[kevinlms]

Kevin,

thanks for reply, I take on board what you say but will say this, the problem with the decoder socket was unrepairable as been a 21pin type it was inpossible to get in it to do anything about the solder. Unlike the 8 pin socket where the pins are accessible the 21 pin was much more difficult to fix & if I'd cocked it up I wouldn't have been able to send it back to the retailer. At the time I didn't know what the cause of the problem was & it was the retailer who supplied the sound module who told me what was wrong. I understand from him that he found other 04's with wires soldered to the wrong terminals!

With regards using a cheap decoder first yes, I suppose I could but as I have a fair amount of experence with decoder fitting I always do a test on my progamming track first to make sure all is well. If there is a problem the Lenz tells me and shuts the system down therefore protecting the decoder.

The reason for the post was to see if anyone out there could give any legal way of getting a refund for those who have lost decoders due to faulty workmanship.

cheers

silverlink

 

OK Silverlink, I didn't realise that the problem related to a much harder to fix 21 pin socket. So I agree, a bit different.

Re-reading your post, I see that you you mentioned this fact, so I apologise for my suggestion.

 

 

Kevin Martin

[Guest dilbert]

With reference to Andy's comments on thread 7 the loco in question was a BR version & not GWR. I understand from my Loksound retailer that mine wasn't a one off and that other customers as well as himself had suffered with this problem. I will see if I can get information from him on Bachmann's response to this problem when he contacted them. Luckily as I have a fair amount of experience with fitting decoders I didn't destroy a valuble decoder however I'm sure there will be many out there that have. I don't think the Bachmann instuctions that came with loco mentions checking the loco on the progamming track first before putting it on the main.

silverlink

 

I think you should post your experience as well to Bachmann in their website 'contact us' section. No doubt they will reply back to you even though you have taken the right appraoch in delaing directly with the retailer.

 

What doesn't sound so good is a potential DCC issue that seems to go beyond that detected on the GWR version... dilbert

[Adrian Wintle]

I don't think the Bachmann instuctions that came with loco mentions checking the loco on the progamming track first before putting it on the main.

 

No, but the Loksound manual explicitly tells you to use a meter to check for shorts...

 

I have seen manuals for other decoders that tell you to use the programming track or a current-limited test track to test your installation.

 

Adrian

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 

If the instructions provided with the 'DCC ready' locomotive tell you to do that then I see your point - although a faulty loco is still a faulty loco - , if they don't; I don't.

There's more than one set of instructions applicable however. The instructions for the product you are installing should also be followed - in this case the decoder - so what does the manufacturer of the decoder say? I don't know in this specific case, never used a loksound; but my usual choices of decoder supplier all state that the programme track should be used. If the installer chooses not to follow this instruction, either due to not having a capable system, or simply ignoring it, the outcome is that customer's liability.

[HLT 0109]

I have two points:

 

1. I can't see that the guidance of the decoder manufacturer are relevant in defence of a claim for a faulty loco.

 

2. The manufacturer's warranty is only of interest if the loco supplier has gone bust or proves intransigent. It is often the limits that manufacturers apply to their warranties that make them unattractive and means your are usually better off claiming for breach of contract by the loco supplier - ie claiming under statute rather than under warranty.

[AMJ]

If it was one of the first ROD's there was an issue whereby the loco runs perfectly on DC with the blanking plug in. But on DCC there is a short between 2 or more pins that are not needed on DC.

 

I spoke to the shop I got it from and they spoke to the Bachmann service dept whilst I was in the shop. Essentially they said send it to Barwell. Barwell were good and the said that it had been tested on DC & DCC and with the returned loco popped a couple of cheap chips in with the returned loco. I tested with a cheap chip then put in sound chip.

 

I did manage to blow a sound chip which was replaced by the supplier for a nominal fee to cover postage.

 

There was/is a thread on here titled Smokey Robinson and a sound supplier also used that title on their website.

[HLT 0109]

If it was one of the first ROD's there was an issue whereby the loco runs perfectly on DC with the blanking plug in. But on DCC there is a short between 2 or more pins that are not needed on DC.

 

I spoke to the shop I got it from and they spoke to the Bachmann service dept whilst I was in the shop. Essentially they said send it to Barwell. Barwell were good and the said that it had been tested on DC & DCC and with the returned loco popped a couple of cheap chips in with the returned loco. I tested with a cheap chip then put in sound chip.

 

I did manage to blow a sound chip which was replaced by the supplier for a nominal fee to cover postage.

 

There was/is a thread on here titled Smokey Robinson and a sound supplier also used that title on their website.

 

I think this demonstrates my second point - your first contact was with the retailer and it was helpful that he established contact for you with Bachmann. It also saved the retailer from having to sort out the problem and then claim from Bachmann but your dealing direct with Bachmann was with their prior agreement. One could argue whether that claim was dealt with under statute or the warranty but it doesn't matter once the problem is solved.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... I can't see that the guidance of the decoder manufacturer are relevant in defence of a claim for a faulty loco...

Indeed it is not. That's for the loco supplier to sort out.

 

But as mentioned in the OP it is the claim for the consequent loss of the decoder that is at issue. The installer failing to follow the decoder manufacturer's instructions is no fault of the loco supplier, and indeed completely outwith his control. The loss lies with the person doing the decoder install and not following the instructions correctly: he had the means to prevent the decoder being damaged, but chose not to use it.

[HLT 0109]

Indeed it is not. That's for the loco supplier to sort out.

 

But as mentioned in the OP it is the claim for the consequent loss of the decoder that is at issue. The installer failing to follow the decoder manufacturer's instructions is no fault of the loco supplier, and indeed completely outwith his control. The loss lies with the person doing the decoder install and not following the instructions correctly: he had the means to prevent the decoder being damaged, but chose not to use it.

 

I accept the principle that the failure of the installer to follow instructions is not the fault of the loco supplier but the instructions of the decoder manufacturer are not something the loco manfacturer or supplier can rely upon to counter a claim for supply of a faulty loco. Are we to accept that the loco manufacturer has so little faith in his quality control procedures that he has to hide behind the trading terms of others? If the problem is wide-spread, one might think the loco manufacturer would put such an instruction in his own paperwork - if he felt it was worth it. I suspect the manufacturer in question takes such a problem on the chin - as appears to have happened in the case of the OP.