Soniq Refusing to Repair or Replace My DOA Speakers - Am I Being Unreasonable?

c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 14:41
Last edited 07/09/2015 - 15:26

I purchased a set of Soniq speakers on the 26th of August through an OZB listing, and they arrived on the 4th of September. The speakers were DOA, refusing to play audio for more than a few minutes before the amplifier made a ticking noise requiring a power cycle. After a power cycle the audio will not play for more than a few seconds before the ticking noise starts again. So they are completely unusable.

Here is the listing for the speakers:
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/208748

I called Soniq the next business day (today) to organise a repair or replacement as I live close enough to their Braeside facility and could drive in this week, and to my dismay they said the pricing was an error (and not a sale) and they would only refund me $4, not repair or replace the speakers, and not refund me the price I paid which was $16. Soniq still sell and stock the speakers at $48.

I told the agent that this was unacceptable and again requested that Soniq repair or replace my speakers as this is what consumer law states.

I've contacted the ACCC through the web form, but was informed that the backlog can take longer than 15 days to be processed.

Am I being unreasonable in requesting I get a replacement, repair or refund of $16 rather than a refund of $4? I don't see how it's acceptable for Soniq to ship me a set of broken speakers and then only refund me $4 instead of the $16 I paid.

Poll Options

  • 8
    You are being unreasonable.
  • 32
    You are not being unreasonable.
Electrical & Electronics

Related Stores

SONIQ
SONIQ

Comments

  • Settero on 07/09/2015 - 14:51
    -3

    i say yes its unreasonable.
    its not their fault that you purchases a item so cheap that shipping made up the majority of the purchase.
    if the item was a 100$ item , with 12$ shipping ,they would still only refund the 100$…

    • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 14:54
      +1

      They still stock and sell the speakers, it's my understanding that a refund is only in order when a product can't be repaired or replaced. Would it not be unreasonable for them to provide a replacement or repair considering I can drive to their facility and be in and out in a couple of minutes.

      So I'm just supposed to throw $12 down the drain? I could have saved myself a lot of time if instead of purchasing from Soniq, I just went to the toilet - opened my wallet and flushed the cash directly.

      • Settero on 07/09/2015 - 15:03

        pretty sure if the repair/replacement costs more than the refund that you are fighting a losing battle, at least legally , you could try shame the company into giving you a replacement.

    • rompastompa on 07/09/2015 - 15:05

      its not their fault that you purchases a item so cheap that shipping made up the majority of the purchase.

      Nothing to do with it. Otherwise every retailer would say an item is worth $1, and shipping is $x.

      This is a representation to a consumer, made at or around the time that goods are supplied, that if the goods (or part of them) are defective, the business will:
      * repair or replace goods (or part of them)
      * resupply or fix a problem with services (or part of them)
      * provide compensation to the consumer.

      Source

      Unfortunately, shipping isn't specifically covered, but one could argue that it should be covered due to the difference in cost.

  • brazen00 on 07/09/2015 - 15:07
    +7

    From the ACCC website:

    When you have a major problem with a product, you have the right to ask for your choice of a replacement or refund

    Note: your choice

    • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 15:10
      +2

      Thanks, that's the validation for my argument that I was looking for.

      Guess I should stick to my guns and battle it out over the next 2+ weeks…

    • cloudy on 07/09/2015 - 21:12

      I believe that statement says you have a right to ask. (and it does sound obvious)

      If the statement said:

      When you have a major problem with a product, you have the right of a replacement or refund of your choice.

      Then I would agree with you.

  • try2bhelpful on 07/09/2015 - 15:21

    https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Warranties%20and%20refu…

    This is the ACCC link on Warranties and Refunds.

    The device is not of merchantable quality so you should get a full refund or a replacement device.

    "Goods must be of merchantable quality – they must meet a level of quality and performance
    that would be reasonable to expect, given their price and description. They should also be free from defects that were not obvious at the time of purchase."

    "Problems with goods – remedies
    If goods do not meet a statutory condition or statutory warranty, it is a breach of the contract between buyer and seller. When this happens, consumers are entitled to a remedy from the seller.
    Types of remedies include refunds, having goods replaced or having goods repaired.
    The form of remedy depends on a number of factors, including when the problem arose and
    whether the problem relates to a breach of a statutory condition or statutory warranty".

    If faulty goods have to be returned to the place where they were bought it is reasonable for the seller to pay the appropriate freight costs."

    If they are DOA then it would appear you have the right to a full refund including the shipping costs, plus any costs to send the faulty device back to them.

    If they keep refusing then take them to the ACCC. If they have any brains they will give you a full refund.

  • jzdhgkd on 07/09/2015 - 16:19

    I don't think anything that's been linked so far is very clear on the situation.

    There's an expectation that the seller would give a "full" refund but it's not specified whether this would include shipping.

    The ACCC link also says the seller will pay the return shipping cost for the product but this definitely would not include the initial $12 for shipping you paid.

    I don't think you'll see any resolution until the ACCC get back to you.

    Keep us informed!

    • try2bhelpful on 07/09/2015 - 17:21

      I would also be interested in what the ACCC have to say about shipping. It does seem to be onerous if the recipient is responsible for shipping costs for goods that have arrived DOA. (Although I wouldn't be surprised if that is the case). My personal preference is to deal with bricks and mortar stores and this is only being reinforced by this sort of thing. I am happy to pay a bit of a premium to take the goods with me and have someone I can physically take it back to if there is an issue.

  • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2015 - 17:43
    +2

    Microsoft on the other hand are stupid.

    I purchased a Lumia 532 and the back cover was cracked. Instead of sending me a replacement back cover (cheapest option) they made me return the broken cover (I had to pay for the box they paid for the postage) just so they could send me a replacement cover at their expense.

    Why Microsoft would want my broken cover is beyond me.

    ============

    As for this case how did you pay? If with PayPal take out a buyer dispute if you paid with a credit card dispute the transaction (I recall someone saying that the retailer is charged $35 per dispute - if I am wrong correct me)

    IT is definitely not your fault if they sell crap. Perhaps if they had better quality control this would not happen. If they are too tight to give you a full refund they should at least offer you a voucher to the value of the item including any postage paid.

    • jzdhgkd on 07/09/2015 - 19:12
      +2

      For your microsoft example, I suspect they wanted firm evidence that it was indeed broken and you weren't just trying to rort (sp?) them.

    • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 21:50

      I paid with PayPal, don't know how it slipped my mind that I could easily do a claim through them.

      I'll get onto it ASAP.

  • oscargamer on 07/09/2015 - 18:39
    +2

    shipping is your responsibility

  • spackbace on 07/09/2015 - 19:32
    +2

    The tough part here is that Soniq could've just refunded everyone, claimed pricing error, and that would be that. Anyone would easily believe $4 was a pricing error (as was thought from the start of that deal post). So they did the nice thing and honoured it. Now this comes along to bite them, and they probably figured they'd lost enough money.

    It's a tough call because it's not an every day situation. Sure, you're entitled to repair or refund or replacement, however they could say that replacement/repair isn't economically viable for them.

    Let me put it another way, let's say you bought a watch, we'll say it's a Rolex. Now on that Rolex is a precious stone, that suddenly gets completely mined out over 6 months, and the value sky-rockets, and the last remaining stock of that watch soar in asking price. Now you have a problem with the watch, and you want a new replacement after 6 months. Rolex couldn't economically offer the same thing, so they'd likely do the same thing, offer to refund the purchase price.

    Am I being unreasonable in requesting I get a replacement, repair or refund of $16 rather than a refund of $4?

    Yes to the refund of $16. No retailer has to refund shipping, and many don't

    • tonyjzx on 07/09/2015 - 19:48
      +1

      Yeah this isnt how a reputable company works. They should replace the speakers, you pick up.

      But this is Soniq we are talking about… another one of a legion of worthless chinese rebadgers.

  • lolmao on 07/09/2015 - 21:31

    I think its pretty standard that they would only refund you the product cost and not the shipping, however it is pretty lame they won't replace it for you. Can you do a credit card chargeback?

  • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 22:03
    +1

    Guys I got bored tonight and decided to try a solder reflow using a heat gun and it seemed to have fixed the problem.

    It's been working the last few hours without any hiccups, which makes me think the problem was most possibly a dry solder joint on the main relay (hence the ticking noise).

    I'll put it through a stress test over the next few days before deciding my course of action, but at this time I have to say I'm actually really impressed with the sound quality even if I paid retail for them. If they start failing again then I will just do a PayPal claim rather than waiting to hear back from the ACCC in 15+ days.

    Screw Soniq for treating me this way, but damn they rebadge a good pair of 2.1 speakers even for the retail price.

    • 17833 on 07/09/2015 - 22:35
      +2

      Glad there is some sort of positive resolution to the problem. My partner picked up my speakers today, she said the lady was a bit grumpy and mentioned it was a price error that they honored. Given that, it is poor form and silly of them to make an issue of it and not simply replace a single unit. My partner saw they had heaps in stock today.

      • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 22:47

        Fair enough. I guess it wasn't actually a clearance item and was price error judging by the stock and sound quality I'm getting from them.

        I really hope my reflow fix keeps mine working. Otherwise I would want the $16 back so I could put it towards a set of these speakers even at RRP. But if they fail and I can't get more than $4 back then I will never buy another Soniq product again, ever.

        I reckon your partner will be very happy with them. They have a great sound signature and pretty full sound stage for a 2.1 setup.

        I was seriously disappointed with the JBL Duet III speakers that had 9x the amount of upvotes as the Soniq deal had. I use a set of JBL LSR305's at work for audio monitoring and whilst they are awesome, they are $500+ for a set. Cheap JBL - never again.

    • adr8 on 08/09/2015 - 00:00
      +1

      Glad you got it sorted, its disappointing Soniq wouldn't replace or even repair them. They had pellets full of them when I went to pick up mine from the warehouse so poor customer service on their behalf.

      Lucky you were able to score another set from JB and for $9 delivered it's even cheaper than the last deal :) I also got another set of the 2.1 and a set of the 5.1 just hope they are not faulty.

      • c0balt on 08/09/2015 - 00:04

        Thanks, but I wouldn't say it's sorted yet. These reflow jobs are never a guaranteed fix and can fail within a few days.

        I am happy that I was able to score another set cheaply though. But now I just don't want to be out of pocket $12 for the freight especially considering that JB had a set for $9 for the speakers AND delivery.

  • spackbace on 07/09/2015 - 23:55
    +1

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/210371

    Looks like the same set, $9 delivered :)

    • c0balt on 07/09/2015 - 23:59

      I jumped on those also, even cheaper than the original deal at $16 delivered.

      Mine are still working after ~6 hours after my solder reflow, but I need to have a backup set in case my reflow job fails. I also got a set of the 5.1 speakers for my bedroom TV.

      To be honest they are easily worth the retail price of $40+ for the 2.1 setup.

  • neostarsx on 01/10/2015 - 20:01

    Not working after 2 uses. Waste of my time.

  • The Hobo on 03/10/2015 - 23:18

    Tried the solder reflow - as I was having the flashing light and could hear a clicking noise.. flashing light gone but speakers only work for about 20 seconds each time i turn them off for a few minutes.

    works well for 20 seconds and then silence.

    Same as before except no flashing light anymore.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join