Refused Refund on Defective Vacuum Cleaner – Forced Repair Against CPA Rights

I purchased a vacuum cleaner from Builders which overheated after the very first use. This clearly indicates a manufacturing defect. When I returned the product, I explicitly requested a refund in terms of the Consumer Protection Act (Section 56), which allows consumers to choose between a repair, replacement, or refund within 6 months if goods are defective. However, I was informed that a refund was not an option and that the vacuum “had to be sent for repairs.” I was not given the choice that the CPA guarantees me. The unit was opened, a part was replaced, and I was then told it now carries a 3-month repair warranty. I am not comfortable accepting a repaired product that failed after a single use. The defect was present from the start, and I exercised my right to request a refund before any repair was done. Store policy cannot override the Consumer Protection Act. I am therefore formally requesting a full refund. I purchased a vacuum cleaner from Builders which overheated after the very first use. This clearly indicates a manufacturing defect. When I returned the product, I explicitly requested a refund in terms of the Consumer Protection Act (Section 56), which allows consumers to choose between a repair, replacement, or refund within 6 months if goods are defective. However, I was informed that a refund was not an option and that the vacuum “had to be sent for repairs.” I was not given the choice that the CPA guarantees me. The unit was opened, a part was replaced, and I was then told it now carries a 3-month repair warranty. I am not comfortable accepting a repaired product that failed after a single use. The defect was present from the start, and I exercised my right to request a refund before any repair was done. Store policy cannot override the Consumer Protection Act. I am therefore formally requesting a full refund. I would appreciate Builders resolving this matter