Who pays the cost of returning the product (complaint).

[Client:109314332]

I bought an item (UGREEN Stojak biurkowy na telefon uchwyt podstawka), which appeared to be broken out of the box.

In polish I can explain the problem as:

Znaczny luz nogi stojaka. Mechanizm jest ewidentnie luźny. Mógł być używany

This is a warranty case as the warranty card says that UGREEN provides 2 years warranty for this item.

I tried to initiate the return using Allegro website. But when I came to the step where I had to shoose the return delivery options all of the options required me to pay. According to the Polish law, the return for warranty cases is covered by the seller, not buyer.

The seller is [edytowano]

So I initiate a law suite against Allegro. And if anybody had the same situation and wants to join - welcome.

Hope Allegro will react to this message and help make things right.

[ko_alka]

@Client:109314332 Hi. 🙂 It seems that you are filing a complaint because the product has a defect. In this case, the buyer most often sends the product back to the seller on his own. If the seller accepts the complaint, he returns all costs you incurred (including the cost of returning the product).
More information can be found here: https://allegro.pl/pomoc/dla-sprzedajacych/prawa-i-obowiazki-sprzedajacego/reklamacje-i-zwroty-od-ku... 

[Client:109314332]

Hello!

Once again I am repeating that this is against the Polish law. What you are trying to suggest is fundamentally wrong from the perspective of my consumer rights in Poland.

Please read the Polish law before posting such absurd!

And I believe I am not the only one struggling with this absurd here. So I am starting a collective lawsuit. Everyone is welcome to join.

[pinsplash]

@Client:109314332 It's not. Using your language : you're fundamentally wrong.

[pinsplash]

@Client:109314332 BTW can you indicate where did you find this : According to the Polish law, the return for warranty cases is covered by the seller, not buyer.

[Client:109314332]

Hello!

Here it is. Please read this carefully:

Konsument składający reklamację z tytułu gwarancji jest zobowiązany dostarczyć wadliwy przedmiot na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub miejsca wydania towaru.

Jeżeli jednak z okoliczności (np. duże rozmiary rzeczy lub skomplikowany sposób montażu) wynika, że wada powinna zostać usunięta na miejscu, konsument jest zobowiązany udostępnić towar gwarantowi (np. pralka w domu).

Podstawa prawna: art. 580 § 1 Kodeksu cywilnego

https://lexlege.pl/kc/dzial-iii-gwarancja-przy-sprzedazy/8915/

https://www.biznes.gov.pl/pl/portal/00309#5

[Client:109314332]

Here it is. Please read this carfully:

Konsument składający reklamację z tytułu gwarancji jest zobowiązany dostarczyć wadliwy przedmiot na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub miejsca wydania towaru.

Jeżeli jednak z okoliczności (np. duże rozmiary rzeczy lub skomplikowany sposób montażu) wynika, że wada powinna zostać usunięta na miejscu, konsument jest zobowiązany udostępnić towar gwarantowi (np. pralka w domu).

Podstawa prawna: art. 580 § 1 Kodeksu cywilnego

https://lexlege.pl/kc/dzial-iii-gwarancja-przy-sprzedazy/8915/

https://www.biznes.gov.pl/pl/portal/00309#5

- So what it says is the warrant should organize and pay for the return right away. 

Allegro is the first shop where I have issues with this. I had cases where I needed to return items by warranty to the other sellers and none of them rejected as they know Polish law. But Allegro just ignores it.

So again, anybody is welcome to join the collective lawsuit against Allegro which I am starting.

[Client:110143050]

@Client:109314332 According to the Polish law, the return for warranty cases is covered by the seller, not buyer.

Yes, but after fact of sending a package. Not before.

What you are trying to suggest is fundamentally wrong from the perspective of my consumer rights in Poland.

As the Pole, I can assure you - it is not against the Polish law. For making our law works in the Internet (where a lot of law is outdated thanks to past with communism) we made some interpretations based on what government consumer control department (called UOKiK) says. It might be confusing but trust me on this - this is perfectly normal and fine.

If seller won't return you money for sending the package, you're free to ask Allegro for help. But if I remember correctly, it is fully automated process at this point so it shouldn't be a problem.

[pinsplash]

---

@Client:110143050 Nie

---

[Client:109314332]

Allegro is deleting my messages with the links to civil law!

[Client:109314332]

Please read this carfully:

Konsument składający reklamację z tytułu gwarancji jest zobowiązany dostarczyć wadliwy przedmiot na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub miejsca wydania towaru.

Jeżeli jednak z okoliczności (np. duże rozmiary rzeczy lub skomplikowany sposób montażu) wynika, że wada powinna zostać usunięta na miejscu, konsument jest zobowiązany udostępnić towar gwarantowi (np. pralka w domu).

Podstawa prawna: art. 580 § 1 Kodeksu cywilnego

https://lexlege.pl/kc/dzial-iii-gwarancja-przy-sprzedazy/8915/

https://www.biznes.gov.pl/pl/portal/00309#5

- So what it says is the warrant should organize and pay for the return right away. 
Allegro is the first shop where I have issues with this. I had cases where I needed to return items by warranty to the other sellers and none of them rejected as they know Polish law. But Allegro just ignores it.

So again, anybody is welcome to join the collective lawsuit against Allegro which I am starting.

[ko_alka]

@Client:109314332 If the complaint regarding the defect of the product is accepted, the seller is obliged to refund you the money for sending back product. In the case of a rejected complaint, the costs are covered by the buyer.

Before checking the condition of the returned product, the seller may not be able to know if the complaint is justified and that's why you send the product back to seller on your own.

Of course, you can contact the seller directly and ask if he is able to arrange the shipment.

[Client:109314332]

@ko_alka @Did you read the text of the law that I posted

There is nothing about return of the delivery expenses afterwards. It states clear that warrant is paying for it right away.

Are you not able to read in Polish? Or are you playing some game here?

[ko_alka]

@Client:109314332 I'm not going to argue with you on this point. Several people in this thread have already given you a similar answer as I did. If you have any doubts about the interpretation, feel free to consult this with someone else, because you already know our answer.

[Client:109314332]

I don't care about YOUR answer. I care about what the law says. And it says it very clearly - the warrant pays for the return delivery. It doesn't say "the warrant returns the cost of delivery". The warrant pays for it right away.

And it is now very clear that Allegro for some reason ignores it and thus doesnt allow the consumers to exercise their rights in this case.

So I am welcoming all who had the same issues to joint the collective lawsuit against Allegro. Because this is not wright.

[Client:110143050]

@Client:109314332 You are wrong.

I care about what the law says. And it says it very clearly - the warrant pays for the return delivery.

Read very carefully, what is written in Polish law:

"Kto wykonuje uprawnienia wynikające z gwarancji"

If your case is not applying to the warranty, it means you're not fullfilling requirement to get the money for your return delivery. Only way to ensure that your case is applying to the warranty is getting the item from you and checking it. There is no way around it. Your lawsuit will be explained by court in 5 minutes.

Second thing is, Allegro is not a shop. This is e-commerce portal for shops to sell (like other A e-commerce portal). If you want to have any complains, seller is responsible one.

[Client:109314332]

Come on, guys can you read? I mean, really?

For some reason you are just trying to turn everything upside down. How it works is: the seller covers the return delivery, and then IF the seller discovers that the case is not warranty case, he can request from the buyer to cover the costs. Not the other way around. This is how it is written. What you are trying to do is to create some kind of interpretation by using your own imagination, where it is not needed as the text is very simple:

Konsument składający reklamację z tytułu gwarancji jest zobowiązany dostarczyć wadliwy przedmiot na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub miejsca wydania towaru.

Guys this is hilarious how you are trying to set everything upside down. And I don't understand why do you need this? Just to witness your complete incompetence?

[Client:109314332]

The text taht you are referring to says exactly the same - "na koszt gwaranta":

Kto wykonuje uprawnienia wynikające z gwarancji, powinien dostarczyć rzecz na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub do miejsca, w którym rzecz została wydana przy udzieleniu gwarancji, chyba że z okoliczności wynika, iż wada powinna być usunięta w miejscu, w którym rzecz znajdowała się w chwili ujawnienia wady.

What's wrong with you guys?🤔

[Client:110143050]

@Client:109314332 Come on, guys can you read?

I'm afraid I CAN read in Polish better than you. 

For some reason you are just trying to turn everything upside down.

I quoted actual law, first words. 

How it works is: the seller covers the return delivery, and then IF the seller discovers that the case is not warranty case, he can request from the buyer to cover the costs. Not the other way around. This is how it is written.

Law says literally this: Kto wykonuje uprawnienia wynikające z gwarancji

You can't use this law, if you're not able to use warranty. It works if warranty lets you to.

Konsument składający reklamację z tytułu gwarancji jest zobowiązany dostarczyć wadliwy przedmiot na koszt gwaranta do miejsca wskazanego w gwarancji lub miejsca wydania towaru.

This is not an actual law content. It's interpretation of law from some website. 

Guys this is hilarious how you are trying to set everything upside down. And I don't understand why do you need this? Just to witness your complete incompetence?

You can't even tell, what did you quote. Complete incompetence is only on your side. I'm sorry.

The text taht you are referring to says exactly the same - "na koszt gwaranta":

And nobody is saying this is not true.

Problem is, you can't just pay someone to make a warranty call first. If warranty not includes your case, what then? Seller's gonna call the police, because you extorted money? Use your brain for a moment.

Also stop lying about "every shop is like this", because this is not true.

[Client:109314332]

Mate, I am giving you the full paragraphs from the Polish law, and in return you are giving me the peace of a sentence to prove that I am wrong. I just consider that as trolling form your side🤣 🤣🤣

If your are saying that I took these paragraphs somewhere else, then please provide me the full paragraph from the law that you are referring to.

"Problem is, you can't just pay someone to make a warranty call first. If warranty not includes your case, what then? Seller's gonna call the police, because you extorted money? Use your brain for a moment."

- In such case the seller can apply to the court according to his rights to do so. That's it. That's his right if he thinks that the case is not warranty case. As simple as that. And your are just trying to interpret it all upside down. If we apply your logic to some other example, then what you are saying is similar to saying: "The customer shouldn't pay anything when he purchases an item in the internet until he opens the box, because he doesn't yet know what is actually in the box." That's funny😂😂😂

I won't say to you "use your brain" on that one, because I already saw how your brain works, and that's enough for me to see.😉 I don't want to go in the direction of personal offence - let's just stay on the side of providing the correct arguments. Thank you.