Halfords partial U-turn on helmets



Tom Crispin wrote:

> On Wed, 02 May 2007 21:05:36 +0100, Tony Raven
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >John B wrote on 02/05/2007 20:52 +0100:
> >>
> >> Two so far this year also :-(
> >>
> >> Its easily fixed but potentially lethal if not.
> >>
> >> John B
> >>

> >
> >Call in Trading Standards. Selling dangerous goods is slap bang in
> >their territory.

>
> In the two cases I encountered it was not the fault of the retailer. I
> find it hard to believe that even Halfords could be that ignorant.


In my two this year, one was the retailer and one the parent.
The latter was partly due to having only a too simplistic diagram
annotated in a foreign language.

Last year we had two brand new bikes that even came _direct_ from the
supermarket to a training session that were completely unroadworthy.

John B
 
Tony Raven wrote:

> John B wrote on 02/05/2007 23:25 +0100:
> >
> > Tony Raven wrote:
> >
> >> John B wrote on 02/05/2007 22:26 +0100:
> >>> Tony Raven wrote:
> >>>> Call in Trading Standards. Selling dangerous goods is slap bang in
> >>>> their territory.
> >>> This has been done.
> >>> I was informed that any complaint really needs to come from the 'aggrieved'
> >>> party but that they were very sympathetic and would perhaps 'have quiet
> >>> words' with a number of local outlets.
> >>>
> >> Ask them if they would take the same attitude to e.g. an electric kettle
> >> with a serious wiring fault that could injure/kill someone.

> >
> > I think the answer might be the same if it came from a third-party.
> >

>
> I think if a kettle repair shop owner came in and said "I'm seeing a lot
> of kettles coming in for repair sold by X that have some very dangerous
> wiring faults in them they would take notice. Its not as if you are a
> casual observer walking down the street - it arises from your experience
> in a professional capacity. YMMV


Which is *exactly* what has been done regarding the bikes and TS have said they
will take a look.


John B
 
Tom Crispin wrote:

> On Thu, 03 May 2007 08:07:10 +0100, Tony Raven
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I think if a kettle repair shop owner came in and said "I'm seeing a lot
> >of kettles coming in for repair sold by X that have some very dangerous
> >wiring faults in them they would take notice. Its not as if you are a
> >casual observer walking down the street - it arises from your experience
> >in a professional capacity. YMMV

>
> The reversed fork problem is no more than reversed handlebars which
> have then been turned the right way round. As the cause and solution
> is so simple, I don't believe it is a bike shop issue.


it is sometimes.
Last year I had one reversed handlebar set-up on a bike that had come
_direct_ from the retailer.
It had been picked up from the store and delivered to the training session
in the back of the car .

I have also had several parents say that the bike had been supplied by the
shop with the incorrect set-up and had wondered why the pedals hit teh
wheel.
I once even came across a reversed handlebar bike on a pre-training session
check and advised the parent to take it back to get it fixed, as there were
other problems too. They did this, and yet still the bike was still returned
unchanged:-(

It is true that many of those parents who choose not to have the bike
assembled and do the set-up themselves can easily make the error. But IME
certain retailers and supermarkets are to blame too.

My heart drops when I see a 'new' Apollo on a session.

John B
 
Simon Brooke wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> Bennett said that presenting cycling as an inherently risk activity was
>> "a real danger" in itself even though a helmet compulsion law would lead
>> to a big increase in helmet sales for Halfords.

>
> It would also lead to a large fall in cycle sales, and I expect there's
> more profit in cycles.
>

Not necessarily.

a) Halfords sells a small proportion of bikes that actually get ridden
b) They don't sell that many high margin bikes.

A