Nephew Down.

I reckon they're just bluffing with regards to it being under warranty. I'm NO expert but I thought everyone was covered by the sale of goods act (or something like that), which says any product bought has to last a reasonable amount of time.

Two years is not a reasonable amount of time for a brand new motorcycle! My brother has claimed loads of refunds/replacementsusing this argument in the last couple of years..............especially with laptops, don't see why a motorcycle should be any different. He did have free legal cover for anything included in his house insurance.......he's had them working like his own personal full time lawyers .

Like I said I'm no expert but I wouldn't give up yet.

[yorkie_chris]

2 years old today? So it was in warranty at the time of the crash...

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

2 years old today? So it was in warranty at the time of the crash...

that was my thinking, plus you notified the dealers before the warranty expired too so I'd just keep it recorded and push it.

If the product failed before the end of the warrernty then the damage is still covered by that warrenty. Provided you can prove that you'd be fine I'd have thought and with it been an accident visited by police you can easily prove the date of it.

By the sounds of it the weld has reacted to air contact and become a darker shade of grey. Having now seen what's actually happened in the off I can honestly say, the headstock should NOT have come off. Think MotoCross, the abuse those frames take constantly I know this was a Derbi not a KTM but still its wrong its just plain wrong. that earth bump is no worse than some of the pot holes I've hit and I'd be banging on the Manufacturer CEO's door if that happened to a bike I was riding.

tbh Im horrified to think that other bikes out there could be at risk of the same thing, something needs to be done to make sure the manufacturer get all these bikes back ASAP before someones less lucky than your nephew.

I think it sounds like a case of not being fit for purpose? contact Trading Standards they'll help you. Hope both your nephews are ok

I hope your nephew is recovering well from his accident and you and our other nephew from the trauma of it all.
I've read and looked at the pictures and its horrify the stae the bike is in
My daughter came off her suzuki 125 at abt 40 on a bend sand all that happehed were scratches and a few bent levers - panicked at corner and the speed she was doing and road surface was loose stoen from resurfacing. She was ok shaken and bruised only
My point is her bike was in tact and your nephews definately wasn't! I know other factors of landing and surface etc can affect but speed was roughly the same.

Good luck with pursuing the legal side even if you dont get money it gets to the pinciple of the build quality that could be in dispute and that is important to us all.

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by littleperson

I hope your nephew is recovering well from his accident and you and our other nephew from the trauma of it all.
I've read and looked at the pictures and its horrify the stae the bike is in
My daughter came off her suzuki 125 at abt 40 on a bend sand all that happehed were scratches and a few bent levers - panicked at corner and the speed she was doing and road surface was loose stoen from resurfacing. She was ok shaken and bruised only
My point is her bike was in tact and your nephews definately wasn't! I know other factors of landing and surface etc can affect but speed was roughly the same.

Good luck with pursuing the legal side even if you dont get money it gets to the pinciple of the build quality that could be in dispute and that is important to us all.

Indeed I've his an audi square on at circa 40mph and I'm still using the bike . 100% undeniability a bad on derbi's part.

Well you could use the Sale of Goods Act I suppose.

But I think you have a better remedy.

I think you'd do better if you complained under the little known Consumer Protection Act 1987, a Brussels-inspired and brilliant piece of legislation.

Linky:

http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/cons...page38253.html

On the right hand side is a link to the UK Government's guide on the Act, which is actually very readable.

in summary does it mean if you spend money on something that meant to be decent and it turns out to be pants you can spank the monkey who made it?

Originally Posted by Ed

Well you could use the Sale of Goods Act I suppose.

But I think you have a better remedy.

I think you'd do better if you complained under the little known Consumer Protection Act 1987, a Brussels-inspired and brilliant piece of legislation.

Linky:

http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/cons...page38253.html

On the right hand side is a link to the UK Government's guide on the Act, which is actually very readable.

Thanks Ed. We really didn't know where to start looking!
It really means a lot to me the sense of community on this forum.
Thanks again everybody.
I know in the grand scheme of things it's only a small off, but it's been a bit of a wake up call for those involved!!