Shocking service in Contravention of CPA

On the 14/01/2019, contract number 002951/02 I bought a bicycle from Lewis stores in Meyerton. The first point that I wish to bring to your attention is that I was sold a demo that was on display and was not given any discount on the price, I was also told that it would be same day delivery and that they just wanted make sure that the Bicycle was in complete working order before they delivered it later the same day, it took the store 3 days and I then went to the store myself and the bicycle was still on display and nothing had been done, they said that I must give then another day, when I returned later the same day again nothing had been done and the bicycle was still in the same position. They said that I can take to bike it’s all good to go but when I got to the traffic cycle a short distance from the store, the bicycle had no brakes and the steering wheel was completely loose and I was unable to steer. I was able with the assistance of my friend who has experience with bicycles tighten the steering and fix the brakes, the wheels were also not straight and the stand was loose and more than once hit again the back rim. A few days later it on a Monday I took the bike back to the store and spoke to the manager, Thebo, he said that he would sort out the problem and would come back to me the next day, this did not happen, on the Second day I went to the store and spoke to Thebo, nothing had been done he promised that by Wednesday which was day 3 he would get back to me, I am currently still waiting for the call. At one point I was told to go and get 2 quotes, while the bike was at the store when I got to the store I was told that Head Office had said that they will not repair the bike no explanation was given except that only the frame was covered, that is despite the fact that I was given a bike off display, charged full price and it was not in a working condition, in fact the bike was in a dangerous condition which could have cause serious injury as a result of the steering and brakes, I also was charged a delivery fee where I had to collect the bike from the store. I collected the bike on the Thursday which was day 4 and it was still in the same condition and was not rideable. I had a friend who used to work on bicycles look at the bike and explained to him what was wong, he should me that the frame at the back was slightly bent, the Jockey is faulty cause as you change gears at the back the chain climbs off the Jockey. In addition, when changing gears to the lowest gear the chain catches again the frame. On Wednesday 13 March, again I took the bike to the shop, after I had spoken to customer care on Monday 11/03.2019 and was advised by them to take the bike back to the store and the store must repair the bike, which they did not do. On my return to the store on Wednesday, I was told that I will get the bike back before lunchtime on the sameday, I got the bike back later the same day, the gears were in a worse condition and you can now actually spin the gears without the bike moving, it is completely unrideable. I again showed my friend who saw that the gears are actually loose and the frame still bent, he then phone the manager and invited the manager down to my place of work to personally come and view the bike which is now in a worse state, the manager said that he personally rode the bike and the bike was fine, my friend again told him that it was impossible to ride the bike in the current condition and was told by the manager to go and get a “cheap” quote to repair and then it will be assessed. This type of service is in contravention of the consumer protection act, Section 56 Consumer Protection Act (CPA) (Imp**** warranty of quality) The CPA imposes a built-in or automatic warranty (commonly known as a guaranty) that all goods sold comply with the requirements listed in Section 55, namely: (a) They are reasonably suitable for the purposes for which they are generally intended; (b) They are of good quality, in good working order and free of any defects; (c) They will be useable and durable (will last) for a reasonable period of time; (d) They comply with the Standards Act/ other public regulations; and (e) They are reasonably suitable for the specific purpose that the consumer has informed the supplier that the consumer wants to use them for. If the goods are not suitable for the purposes for which they are intended or otherwise fail to comply with the requirements listed in Section 55, the consumer is entitled to return them, at the supplier’s risk and expense and without penalty, and: (a) Have the item(s) repaired; or (a) Have the item(s) replaced; or (b) Get a full refund of the price paid. Your product guarantee says that one can be assured that you are buying a product of the highest quality and that is definitely not the case and the product is clearly defective in fact I want to say that the store should be held personally liable for the further damages that have occurred while they were supposed to be repairing the bike as it is now undriveable and it was in there position. This was purchased to be my form of transport to and from work, hence it falls within the scope of section 56 and is now costing me money for repairs, time and effort contacting the store and going to the store, I have had to take time off to sort this problem and to date I have had no success. Lewis claims “Getting our service right is important to us” really there is a complete lack of service and customer support. I now state in writing that the product in terms of the CPA must be replaced with immediate effect and that I be reimbursed for all costs that relate to the repair of the bike, including the numerous telephone calls which are never returned