Why is it acceptable for retailers to send out defective models when there are known problems ?

[Ian Hargrave]

It would be an interesting but impractical exercise to discover the figures for numbers of failures 'on delivery' and then compare them with the figures for defects subsequently 'in traffic'.  Retailers cannot be held responsible for the latter. Of my two Dapol 'turkeys',it was a case of one of each.

    Surely,this is a manufacturing issue......and it is right that the issue is being aired here. Yes,I know that many of you feel uncomfortable with what 'Tor Giffard' has posted......but there IS an issue and yes it DOES need to be addressed.He is not being eccentric.

[The Stationmaster]

Why all the onus on the retailers?  Surely it should be the 'manufacturer' who carries out the necessary quality testing etc?  That might not necessarily be at the factory as it could just as readily be in Britain when the models arrive  and it would clearly add to costs and thus increase prices but it seems a lot more logical than lumbering the retailer with the job and the potential cost of having dodgy stock.  

 

However if the market continues to put price above just about everything else then it will continue to get what the majority of it appears to want - cheap and not necessarily cheerful.

[PhilH]

 

I'd rather have one good product purchased at a realistic price rather than several lower quality ones at cheap as chips prices

 

 

But, as has been raised in previous posts, some of us have been lucky enough to have purchased very good quality models at very reasonable cost, with n'ary a dud.

 

What's all the fuss about?

[The Stationmaster]

Its the "price as low as possible" thing driven by what one may call the Collector Mentality that's causes any issues with build quality....

 

I'd rather have one good product purchased at a realistic price rather than several lower quality ones at cheap as chips prices

Interestingly Mickey the few 'proper' collectors I've come across as far as r-t-r is concerned have all seemed to have one heck of a lot more money than the average model railway buyer.  I think it's not so much the real collectors (who are relatively few in number I suspect) but those who like to amass large numbers of locos - and often not much else - who are the ones who are keenest on 'looking for bargain prices'.

[Downendian]

Its the "price as low as possible" thing driven by what one may call the Collector Mentality that's causes any issues with build quality....

 

I'd rather have one good product purchased at a realistic price rather than several lower quality ones at cheap as chips prices

Completely agree Mickey, I'd much rather buy a slightly more expensive model to ensure better QC. But the 4mm Dapol models are among the most expensive RTR diesels ranging from £100-125.

 

I have a similar number of Bachmann peaks to Westerns which were picked up (brand new i add) a smidge over £50. Not a single problem to report from my peak fleet which has actually more mileage on the clock now. Similar applies to Bachy Warships and Heljan Hymeks as this is a hydraulic centric thread.

 

Neil

[Andy Y]

Whilst the title of this thread is:

 

Why is it acceptable for retailers to send out defective models when there are known problems ?

 

Assuming that there are known problems at the time of shipping, perhaps you should be asking:

 

Why is it acceptable for retailers manufacturers to send out defective models [to retailers] when there are known problems ?

 

Mornin' all,

 

Given the number of defective Western and class 22 models reaching customers retailers, why isn't every class 22 and 52 tested for the known problems before it is mailed to the customer retailer? The unfortunate customers retailers are having to [sell] put up with 'unfit for purpose' models and the cost of posting them back to the source manufacturer and refunding the postage of the customer.

 

 

 

I think you're heading in the right direction Gary but I'd probably go a stage further:

 

Why is it acceptable for retailers manufacturers  factories to send out defective models [to retailers] [to importers] when there are unknown problems ?

 

Generally our main 'manufacturers' aren't anything of the sort these days but importers who commission models from a selection of factories. The importer may have a specification and a contract as a framework to getting the product but errors, substitutions or omissions can happen even within that and I know of instances where products from three of the importers have involved a mass 'return to sender' or 'stop right there' because of deviation from the framework; however some slip through and is it reasonable or practical for the importer to check every product in the batch (sample QC does take place) before onward distribution to the retailer or direct to the customer?

 

I think the expectation for a good level of problem-free products is fair but it's also fair to say that all manufacturers can, and do, have periodical issues to a level that's proportionate to the closeness of the relationship with the factory. Duds can happen and it impacts upon everyone but the importer is the one who generally carries the largest burden so they have the biggest incentive to be consistent unless they have a contractual relationship with the factory to pass that burden (as the retailer and consumer do) one step back up the supply chain.

[The Stationmaster]

There is a quite well know story in the world of quality planning about a company (I think in the USA) who decided to buy in some components from a Japanese source.  They duly supplied a detailed spec and all the necessary drawings and specified that they required a certain level of compliance with spec - I think they said they were prepared to accept not less than 98% or thereabouts.  When the stuff was delivered and tested they found that exactly 98% was fully compliant to spec and 2% wasn't so they asked the Japanese manufacturer to explain what problems had been encountered.

 

Back came a reply saying no problems, you asked for 98% of the 'whatevers' to be fully compliant with spec so that was what we supplied.  Lesson - when specifying compliance or quality standards be precise and think very carefully about your spec.

[BromsMods]

Why all the onus on the retailers?  Surely it should be the 'manufacturer' who carries out the necessary quality testing etc?  That might not necessarily be at the factory as it could just as readily be in Britain when the models arrive  and it would clearly add to costs and thus increase prices but it seems a lot more logical than lumbering the retailer with the job and the potential cost of having dodgy stock.  

 

However if the market continues to put price above just about everything else then it will continue to get what the majority of it appears to want - cheap and not necessarily cheerful.

 

Hi Mike.  I don't normally read your posts as I can't stand the italics you insist on using.  However, whilst I agree with the sentiment of your contribution above I'm not sure you understand the legal responsibility of the retailer, who is caught between a rock and a hard place, being responsible for the carriage costs to and from the customer and also often has to meet the costs of returns to the supplier/manufacturer. The retailer, not the manufacturer, is also responsible for ensuring the product sold is of merchantable quality and meets all safety requirements.

 

Having been caught by cases of "defective locos" soon after starting to trade in them I always then tested locos before despatching and enclosed a note to state that fact and also give some guidelines for unpacking them.  Not suprisingly, the number of returns reduced to zero!  However, testing of locos sold at shows was a different matter as it would become completely impractical to test when being surrounded by dozens of other customers. 

 

Testing does provide another benefit and that is it can prevent a whole defective model range reaching customers.  Testing I carried out did reveal a number of loco defects and a couple of loco models supplied by one manufacturer were all returned to them (at their cost this time) when we pointed out the problems with them.

[The Stationmaster]

A very important point John and thanks for raising it (although I was aware of it) - and noting the wide range of costs which fall on the retailer and can hit his bottom line.  And while I don't argue one bit with the legal position you have explained I remain of the view that the fault lies much further back in the supply chain - the likes of you simply carry the can for others' shortcomings and in my view that is not right because the responsibility and cost will never wholly be placed where it should be.

[Legend]

Just one other point to make, it is actually very difficult getting models out the box these days. Do Hornby still have that screw in arrangement? So this makes it somewhat impractical for retailers to test (although I do prefer mail order houses that do). The emphasis has got to be on the manufacturers selling good products in first place

[PhilH]

And, of course, paying extra guarantees nothing...combustible Ferrari 458 anyone?

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Given you've spent enough time moaning about your trio, I'd have thought that would make you the ideal candidate for the job at Dapol. At least you'll be in a position to make life truly unpleasant for the Chinese, whilst Dapol consumers in turn make life less pleasant for you.

 

...it is a fundamental requirement H (even with the deeper flange depth of OO) for all wheels to be correctly gauged, concentric, squarely mounted and for all wheel rims to be in contact with flatly laid track at the same time. It is a complete waste of time going any further until that aspect of manufacture is excellent, with the QC in place to ensure that it remains so.

 

Prior to any contract being awarded I would have ensured that (as an absolute minimum) this was consistently achievable by any factory bidding for the work.

 

There is no rocket science here...it is the same for all working model railway items. 

 

Dave

[PhilH]

 

 by any factory bidding for the work

 

 

Could be wrong but isn't it the case that various manufacturers bid for time in the few factories that make these models, competing against US manufacturers et al?

 

As I say I could be well wide of the mark here, but I didn't think there were that many plants left.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

....you may be right Phil. However, fewer more specialised factories should be even more adept at 'nailing' this most basic stage.

 

Dave

[Ian Hargrave]

But, as has been raised in previous posts, some of us have been lucky enough to have purchased very good quality models at very reasonable cost, with n'ary a dud.

 

What's all the fuss about?

You,then,have been fortunate.....if there was no problem in general terms,then this topic would not have run to the number of postings ....68.....currently on line. Please do not  colour it with the word 'fuss'. These are genuine concerns posted by members with valid reasons,most of them articulately aired and not a bunch of eccentric whingers.

[Giles]

Just in case anyone is unaware of their rights - European law entitiles you to return faulty goods (under certain conditions) for TWO years, not the one year, as many people (and retailers) still think.

 

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_info/10principles/en.pdf

[orcadian]

....you may be right Phil. However, fewer more specialised factories should be even more adept at 'nailing' this most basic stage.

 

Dave

Torr,

I agree with the 'should' part of this statement, and I agree with the central thrust of your points throughout this thread, that the first fundamental requirement is that the models are made/assembled to a sufficiently high, consistent standard. It's perhaps unfortunate that the thread has been placed in a single British 'producer's' sub-forum, as it does seem to be quite relevant to all our RTR names, but that's a result of the Forum structure, and not a criticism.

 

However, I've seen, more than once, that these Chinese factories have a very high rate of staff turn-over, especially around the time of the Chinese New Year. It has been reported/suggested that unskilled and perhaps semi-literate people come in to find reasonably well-paid (by local standards) jobs in a few big cities, but leave and return to their family village, almost peasant economy after they feel they have enough money to help at home, or when the family need them back.  This means that there is little continuity nor development of experience and skill on the factory floor. If that really is the case, it's hard to see how a sense of pride in the quality of the product, or a desire to always do a good job, etc. can be encouraged and nurtured.

 

I wonder what staff turn-over rates were at Binns Road, Liverpool, or in Basildon were in the Hornby Dublo/Meccano or Wrenn era, or at the Triang/Rovex factories, but their products do seem to have been more consistently reliable!  But looking at some other threads in RM Web, we can see the price tags attached to the hand-built products of Loveless, Golden Age, etc.  Can product pride, quality  and quantity of production ever be achieved at the prices the 'average' British model railway purchaser now wants to pay?

 

I have every sympathy for those who are working to establish the best standards for their companies products - and satisfy all the desires of their customers! I can't see any easy answer, but as you said so succinctly - until the most fundamental requirements in a model are met, there is little point in going any further!

 

Richard

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Richard,

 

....if the bean counters in the employ of the manufacturers dictate using the cheapest factories to produce their goods, then they also need the best 'quality control' in order to maintain standards. There is no excuse for the often pathetic situation that we are now in.

 

Dave

[Verityboo]

Just in case anyone is unaware of their rights - European law entitiles you to return faulty goods (under certain conditions) for TWO years, not the one year, as many people (and retailers) still think.

 

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_info/10principles/en.pdf

Sorry but that was never adopted in the UK because the existing Sale of Goods Act (SOGA) gives the consumer rights for up to 6 years. If it had been adopted it would have been a retrograde step

 

Those rights under the SOGA are with the unfortunate retailer who is stuck in the middle

[BromsMods]

Well the easiest way to solve this is for purchasers to only buy from the manufacturers or importers website. That way the retailers aren't caught in the middle. The manufacturer will get all the returns back and know whether its a storm in a teacup, or a partial or complete production run problem that's being reported by their customers. Problem items should be relatively easily replaced under SOGA assuming the manufacturer or importer hasn't sold out.

 

Of course you'll be paying full RRP for this level of service though.

 

And that way you'll no longer have any need for retailers......!!  Retailers certainly won't get caught in the middle as they won't be there for you to view products or discuss problems or developments.....!!

[Les1952]

Well the easiest way to solve this is for purchasers to only buy from the manufacturers or importers website. That way the retailers aren't caught in the middle. The manufacturer will get all the returns back and know whether its a storm in a teacup, or a partial or complete production run problem that's being reported by their customers. Problem items should be relatively easily replaced under SOGA assuming the manufacturer or importer hasn't sold out.

 

Of course you'll be paying full RRP for this level of service though.

 

Oddly enough the only two Dapol locos I've had to send off to DCC Supplies for sorting were both bought direct from Dapol........

 

One of these was a Class 26 with a Super Creep motor that overheated, the other an A3 whose valve gear failed after about 6 inches of travel, probably due to transit damage.

 

All the very best

Les

[81A Oldoak]

I always liked the 164.

I ran a 145 Cloverleaf for several years. It was a peach. 

[Bert Cheese]

I ran a 145 Cloverleaf for several years. It was a peach. 

I'd have to agree...my current 156 being the 8th Alfa I've owned since 1991...all usually kept for around 3 years (don't mention the crashed GTV!) with no major problems to speak of.

Hopefully I'll be in a Brera in a couple of years time too.

 

Perhaps slightly irrelevant...but it shows that lazy media portrayals of some products should be taken with a pinch of salt?

[admiles]

I'd have to agree...my current 156 being the 8th Alfa I've owned since 1991...all usually kept for around 3 years (don't mention the crashed GTV!) with no major problems to speak of.

Hopefully I'll be in a Brera in a couple of years time too.

 

Perhaps slightly irrelevant...but it shows that lazy media portrayals of some products should be taken with a pinch of salt?

Totally of topic but I have a 147 JTD which cost me a grand total of £400 2.5 years and 90k miles ago. Now on 260k miles and shows no sign of stopping. Owes me nothing and pulls like a train. Use it to keep miles off my 1 series BMW!

 

As for my experience of Dapol locos. Don't get me started - never again sadly!

[darren01]

Hi 

I have had my 22 since they first came out and have had no problems with it, But one of the class 52 blow the PCB and stopped working after five mins running,sent it back and since then not had a problem with it.