Two years, two batteries and dozens of e-mails later: No complaints

Save

Marthe Heyerdahl just wanted to buy an electric scooter for her daughter. After searching for a long time for an electric scooter that could fit a 12-year-old child, the choice finally fell on the company E-wheels’ E2S V2 at NOK 4,000. She would later regret it, for 2.5 years and repeated repairs later, the daughter is left without a functioning electric scooter. E-wheels refuses to cancel the purchase.

It all started on 24 September 2021, Heyerdahl buys the electric scooter.

– The purchase experience itself was very easy, and the electric scooter was delivered quickly. The first impression was that it was absolutely superb, Heyerdahl explains to Tek.

– Until the problem of not being able to charge arose, she says.

Barely a year after buying the scooter, it stopped charging. Heyerdahl contacted the company, which asked for a number of photos of the product to assess whether there was water damage to the scooter. They admitted that the scooter appeared well used and Heyerdahl himself drove the electric scooter from Holmestrand to Hokksund to deliver it for repair.

The scooter worked for a little while, but barely a year later the same thing happens again. The company asks Heyerdahl once again to send a number of photos, as well as remove the cover and battery himself to see the motherboard. But now Heyerdahl has had enough. On 1 September 2023, she therefore asks to cancel the purchase. She gets this rejected a few days later.

– Unfortunately, it is not possible to cancel the purchase here as the right of withdrawal has expired, here we can take it into our workshop to examine and repair, writes E-wheels’ Team Leader in an e-mail to Heyerdahl.

However, this is not true according to the Consumer Council.

– The company has waited so long to handle the complaint in a proper way that she has been given the right to cancel the purchase, says consumer lawyer at the Consumer Council, Thomas Iversen.

E-wheels has not responded to Tek’s questions about the case, but states in an e-mail that the case as presented is incorrect and incomplete.

Read the full response to E-wheels at the bottom of the case.

• Do you have a similar story or another tip for us?
  Contact the Tek.no editorial team at [email protected]!

5 year complaint period

First and foremost, electric scooters have a 5-year warranty period, according to Iversen.

– The reason for this is that, in our opinion, such vehicles should last longer than three and a half years in normal use, says Iversen, who also admits that they are aware that some suppliers believe there is a two-year claim period.

– Something we think is wrong – especially from an environmental and sustainability perspective, he says.

But even with a two-year claim period, Heyerdahl would in theory have been within, because it hadn’t been two whole years before she asked to cancel the purchase. So she won’t get that.

The Consumer Council: – has a right to rescission

The company repeatedly states that there is nothing they can do other than repair the e-scooter, which leaves Heyerdahl feeling she has no other option but to let them send a new battery and bottom cover. The latter had been worn out from being turned up again and again, as a result of the many battery changes.

Therefore, E-wheels writes, on 25 September 2023, that they will send a new battery, together with the bottom cover and screws “due to long service time”.

The battery will not be replaced until April 2024, as the e-scooter season was over when the battery arrived. On 4 April, Heyerdahl sends a new email to E-wheels:

– We have changed the battery and the bottom cover we were sent last autumn, according to the video from you on the website. It is still not possible to charge the scooter. Now we have been at it for two years, the bike has been with you for repairs, we have changed the battery ourselves, but this scooter still does not work. After two seasons without a scooter and several unsuccessful attempts to fix it, I want to cancel the purchase or have the scooter replaced with a new item.

The fact that she doesn’t change the battery until 6 months have passed, E-wheels claims in an email to Tek, is part of the reason why it “has made it difficult for us to cancel the purchase without further investigation.”

However, this explanation is not a stated justification in the actual email dialogue between Heyerdahl and E-wheels, nor is this described as a criterion in advance of the mailing. On the other hand, they point out that they don’t quite know what the problem is when the battery won’t turn on, but want to troubleshoot to find out what the problem is.

– We apologize for the inconvenience this causes and will of course help you, even if the scooter is outside the right of complaint. It is somewhat difficult to say exactly where the fault lies, but we can troubleshoot with parts if you are comfortable changing parts yourself, says the dialogue between E-wheels and Heyerdahl, among other things.

But here the company is wrong, according to the Consumer Council, which states that she has the right to complain, and interest on the delay.

– The customer was initially entitled to a free repair, but she now has the right to cancellation. Withdrawal assumes that the purchase price is paid back, while the customer sends the bike back to the seller. The customer is not obliged to drive to Hokksund to deliver the bike, explains Iversen and points out that the customer himself felt obliged to deliver the electric kick bike to their workshop.

– She is also entitled to late payment interest from 1 September 2023 – the time she first demanded cancellation.

He also points out that this problem should have been fixed a long time ago.

– In my opinion, the faults with the bike should have been discovered the first time it was in the workshop. Then they should either have been fixed, or alternatively the customer could have received a new electric scooter of a similar type.

E-wheels believes the case has been misrepresented

Tek asked E-wheels a number of questions related to the right to claim, and Heyerdahl’s case specifically. The company has not answered any of our questions. On the other hand, they believe that the case has been presented incorrectly, and point out that in an e-mail to them we made a concise summary of Heyerdahl’s case. The company believes that the summary is presented so incorrectly that this will go beyond the Consumer Council’s assessment of the case, as they only had access to our summary, and not the entire e-mail exchange between Heyerdahl and E-wheels.

Tek.no, in consultation with Heyerdahl, therefore chose to send the e-mail correspondence in its entirety to the Consumer Council. This does not change their view on the matter. Their comment after reading the dialogue in its entirety follows below:

– The extensive dialogue between the parties shows that the consumer clearly points out that it is cumbersome to transport the electric scooter from Holmestrand to Hokksund. It is the company’s risk that they do not have good enough routines to handle complaints far away from their workshop premises. She also emphasizes that the parties have tried for a long time with both repairs and diagnosis without reaching any solution.

– Based on the dialogue between the parties, it may appear that the company has lost its right to remedy the deficiencies, and the consumer had the right to rescission when she demanded it the first time.