BUILDERS WAREHOUSE GEZINA – TWO IDENTICAL RYOBI GG-100 GLUE GUNS FAILED, BUT APPARENTLY ONLY ONE DESERVED “GOOD FAITH”

PUBLIC COMPLAINT – BUILDERS WAREHOUSE GEZINA – TWO IDENTICAL RYOBI GG-100 GLUE GUNS FAILED, BUT APPARENTLY ONLY ONE DESERVED “GOOD FAITH”

Builders, I would like a straight answer to a very simple consumer question.

How can two examples of exactly the same RYOBI product, carrying exactly the same SKU, bought from exactly the same Builders Warehouse Gezina store and both returned within six months be treated completely differently?

The product is the RYOBI GLUE GUN 80W GG-100, barcode/SKU ***.

One was purchased on 29 March 2026 for R134 after discount. After approximately three and a half to four months it developed an electrical fault and began tripping the electricity when plugged in. Your own documentation dated 20 September 2026 records the fault as: “it trips power and it is not working.” It is presently sitting in your system under Repair Ref REP-B1R4EFMHU88, serial number ***.

The second identical RYOBI GG-100 was purchased on 17 September 2026 for R169. It failed within days. That one was taken back and the receipt records it as refunded.

Then I spoke to Stefan Haywood.

The call is recorded.

Stefan Haywood's explanation for why one defective unit was accommodated while the other was not dealt with in the same manner was that what Builders did with the one unit amounted to a “sign of good faith.”

Really?

Good faith?

Both glue guns are the same make. The same model. The same SKU. The same retailer. The same store. Both failed. Both fall within six months.

The Consumer Protection Act is not a Builders customer-service favour.

Section 56 does not depend upon whether a manager feels benevolent on a particular morning. Where defective goods qualify under the statutory warranty within six months, the legislation gives the consumer the right to direct the remedy.

I elected a refund for the 29 March unit.

Instead, Builders Warehouse Gezina placed it into a repair process.

That is the issue.

For the avoidance of any misunderstanding, I also want to say publicly that Assistant Manager Rafa at Builders Warehouse Gezina is not the problem here. Rafa has always been extremely helpful. He is professional, he assists customers, and in my experience he goes beyond what is required of him. I will not allow a legitimate complaint about Builders' decision-making to unfairly tarnish an employee who has consistently tried to help.

The problem is the contradiction.

If Builders was entitled to refuse the statutory remedy I selected on the first product, then explain the legal basis.

If Builders was not entitled to refuse it, then refund it.

But please do not tell consumers that honouring a defective-product complaint on one identical unit is “good faith” while forcing another identical unit through a different process.

That does not answer the complaint. It exposes it.

There is also a broader issue Builders should not ignore. Two examples of the same RYOBI GG-100, SKU ***, failed after being purchased months apart. One of those units developed an electrical fault severe enough to trip the power supply.

I have supp**** Builders and Massmart with the documentary evidence. I have also escalated the product-quality and electrical-safety issue directly to RYOBI South Africa.

Consumers are entitled to speak publicly about defective products and their treatment by retailers. I have the receipts, the fault documentation and the recorded communication supporting what I am saying.

And based on these two failures, my consumer advice is clear: do not buy the RYOBI GG-100 glue gun, SKU ***, unless and until RYOBI and Builders can properly explain why two units of the same model failed within months of purchase and what has been done about it.

Builders Warehouse Gezina now needs to stop treating my refund election as a repair request and resolve Repair Ref REP-B1R4EFMHU88 accordingly.