Four months ago I bought a laptop for a very good price through an online retailer. The laptop was delivered with a defective display. In the sense of supplementary performance, I have sent the laptop for repair to the dealer. After several weeks came the message that a repair was too expensive and therefore I would like to refund the money.
Since I had purchased the laptop in the course of a limited-time action at a very good price, I would like to have a new device, which the dealer currently rejects by e-mail.
Can I insist on the delivery of a new device, or do I have to accept the refund - and pay more for the same laptop elsewhere?
Yes you can.
The trader can only challenge the subsequent performance if the claim is disproportionate.
Since a repair was "rejected" only the subsequent performance remains through a new delivery.
You could accept money back on goodwill, but you do not have to.
The decision as in the warranty case is made, the seller decides, in which case the shop where you bought it. If the shop / dealer is of the opinion to refund you the purchase price and does not want to do the repair for a reason. That's his decision.
References to:
§ 437 BGB
§ 438 I No. 3 BGB
§439 I Civil Code
Thank you for your help! What does it look like if the desired model is no longer available from the online retailer and / or in the assortment? What are my rights here?
439 BGB states: "The buyer may demand as supplementary performance at his discretion the elimination of the defect or the delivery of a defect-free product."
Exception would be only if it would be disproportionately more expensive for the seller, since the laptop is only 4 months old and probably has not multiplied its value or has become a collector's items, the dealer can't simply withdraw from the contract, the repair would already be rejected.
439 BGB states: "The buyer may demand as supplementary performance at his discretion the elimination of the defect or the delivery of a defect-free product."
Exception would be only if it would be disproportionately more expensive for the seller, since the laptop is only 4 months old and probably has not multiplied its value or has become a collector's items, the dealer can't simply withdraw from the contract, the repair would already be rejected.
Comment should be to the other answer.
The
Buyer can be considered a supplementary performance
at his option the elimination of the defect
or the delivery of a faultless item.
Not the seller decides, but the buyer, § 439 BGB
The
Seller can choose the type of remedy chosen by the Buyer without prejudice to the §
https://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/275.html para. 2 and 3
refuse, if only with
disproportionate
Cost is possible.
There are more requirements for that.
Therefore, he refunds the purchase price, which is in his decision. Thus, the warranty would be fulfilled. If a customer refuses, that would be wrong. You can go out and ask for a voucher and buy a cheaper device that would appeal to the dealer as an alternative solution.
In both cases the warranty would be fulfilled.
If the dealer seriously and finally refuses the subsequent performance or you have set a deadline that has expired and the defect is significant, you can also claim the so-called Great Compensation. This is then the purchase price paid and then non-performance damage then the cost of replacement.
So far, that still comes, that warranty is met by money back.
I have a contract, the seller gets money I get a free goods. Point!
Everyone has to comply with the contract, only when the fulfillment of the contract becomes disproportionate (it no longer gives the goods or is irreparable and the price has increased disproportionately) then the seller can withdraw from the contract (= money back).
Simply dissolving a contract is not.
Not the seller decides, but the buyer, § 439 BGB
This is unfortunately wrong. The seller decides what to do in the warranty. If he decides to reimburse the purchase price, then the customer must also accept this or he can also request a voucher and buy a device cheaper. In both cases the warranty is fulfilled.
It is always stated that the customer has influence on the warranty, It is clearly regulated in the mentioned § which possibilities are available and which are not.
If the seller rejects the repair for reasons mentioned above, a partial performance of the warranty is given. If the seller then offers the refund of the purchase price and the customer refuses this would be the wrong way. The customer can't insist on a repair because of the situation because the seller has justified the cause. If you want to drive it to the extreme, there's only the right of way to the court!
If the customer gets the purchase price refunded or receives a voucher, then the warranty according to the above § is fulfilled.
Remember, I have a shop myself and have to conduct some negotiations only as some had a different opinion!
Civil Code (BGB)
§ 439 supplementary performance
(1) The purchaser may demand, as supplementary performance, the elimination of the defect or the delivery of a defect-free product at his discretion.
Who can read reads: the BUYER can be used as a supplementary service…
It is assumed that the buyer decides because it is so clearly in the law, in general one can assume that the law is as valid as it is written and if there's the buyer decides, then decides only the buyer and no other.
So far, that still comes, that warranty is met by money back.
I have a contract, the seller gets money I get a free goods. Point!
If you did that to me, you would have an ad for cheating on your neck and I would even sue you. Is it really worth the few toads if one is wrong?
Everyone has to comply with the contract, only when the fulfillment of the contract becomes disproportionate (it no longer gives the goods or is irreparable and the price has increased disproportionately) then the seller can withdraw from the contract (= money back).
Contract performance is given by repayment of the purchase price. If you do not accept that, it will only be legal, and I already know who loses.
Simply dissolving a contract is not.
He does not dissolve the contract. He fulfills him by the mentioned §
It would not be true if he did neither repay you nor repair you. Since he offers the repayment, accept you better. It saves you a lot of trouble and problems as well as a process that you lose. I have a shop myself I know of what I write!
Then you always do it wrong.
Who can read reads: the BUYER can be used as a supplementary service…
§ 439 supplementary performance
(1) The purchaser may demand, as supplementary performance, the elimination of the defect or the delivery of a defect-free product at his discretion
The selection is not up to the buyer
Repair was rejected because it exceeds a certain value of the device
Seller offers repayment, thus the warranty according to § 439 is fulfilled
WHO CAN READ IS CLEAR IN ADVANTAGE!
Yes, so shopkeepers I know, when the title comes in from the court and my attorney fees then complain they always regret that they have done business with, but that is their problem if they can't read the Civil Code and try to rauszuwinden
That's such a curious nonsense. The questioner should ignore this very urgently. This is absolutely nonsense and for that I do not even need my law degree to recognize that, since even simple reading.
@ silver fan
I'm set is exactly what the buyer decides
Do I have to come over and read that to you. You have just written the paragraph itself and there's now on the buyer can or desire, there's not the seller can choose anything else but only the buyer A or B can ask and Basta.
You may like to try it with me then I want to see you crying in front of the court doors to see if then the Vereinbahrungen are hit you then ban the mouth!
I like to steal such customers like you and put them to the filing P like trash!
I'm set is exactly what the buyer decides
Unfortunately nobody reads the OR in the text, so the seller has the choice for what he offers the customer. 2 solutions were mentioned 2 solutions were processed. Anyone can write that much if their customer is right or not. If your client refuses to come up with the proposed solution, the only thing left is the court and I will finish this discussion here [edited by Support, please stay factual!]. END OF DISCUSSION!
The "or" is there because he has two different choices. Therefore, he has a choice… If only one, then that would be no choice.
Elimination of the defect or new delivery.
after his, so after the choice of the buyer. Do not believe?
[edited by Support, please stay factual]
If a defect is present, the buyer can demand in the first place supplementary performance, §§437 Nr1, 439. Resignation, reduction and compensation come grds. Only when a deadline set for the seller has expired. Whether the buyer wants to repair or subsequent delivery, is his choice, §439 I. This buyer's right of choice is limited only in special circumstances, such as impossibility §275 I (is not present), Unvehältnißmäßigen costs, §439 IV S1, in gross mismatch between effort and interest, §275 II and unreasonableness, §275 III. Even then, however, as a rule further remedy remains possible.
If the seller refuses to remedy the defect or if he allows a reasonable time limit to set, the buyer may, according to his own choice, proceed according to §437 Nr2 and 3.
Nvm.
Yes, I expressed myself unclearly. I mean the extra cost of a replacement.
So if the replacement is more expensive, then the price of replacement.
Habs then noticed as you said so. It's late. That's why I changed it. Who takes it more exactly
The seller delivers a defective item. The money of the buyer is good enough; and then he should also submit to the discretion of the seller, who has already delivered no defect-free thing?
