Hi all,

A customer (this is an actual business and not a private customer) has bought an item from us (a printer) has said they had to run a head clean on the printer when they got it as it didn't print very well.

Below is what has been said, I've asked the customer to return the item for a refund, we don't give out extra cartridges or discounts.

Usually what we find with these sort of claims when the printer is returned, far more print outs have happened and they are just trying to get more out of us

as the inks that come with the printer don't last very long.

We told them they are starter cartridges that prime the head and if you have done some head cleans, this is where the ink has gone, had there been an issue with the item it should of been returned straight away.

Customer is refusing to open a return the item and is saying they would take joy in opening and a-z claim, so this guy knows what he is doing, this obviously isn't his first time of doing this.

Any advise guys or Mods please

Hello,

Thank you for your response.

You’ve confirmed that my 385-page calculation is correct, which aligns with Brother’s own published figures. Yet the issue remains that the ink was exhausted after only nine pages — a result so far from the expected figure that even the most generous interpretation of “starter cartridge” cannot account for it.

Those cleaning cycles you referenced were not excessive use; they were required because the printer was not printing correctly straight out of the box. Any ink used to correct a fault on setup is not a matter of “user consumption” — it’s a matter of product performance.

The assertion that starter cartridges have “no value” is simply inaccurate. They are part of the product I purchased and are explicitly referenced in your Amazon listing, which states:

“Up to 550 pages in-box inks.”

That phrase forms part of the description on which the sale was based. Whether the cartridges are “starter” or “standard,” the listing promises that the inks supplied in the box will yield up to 550 pages. If a full LC422 produces 550 pages and the starters are, as you’ve said, approximately 70 % of that, the reasonable expectation remains around 385 pages.

The real-world outcome of nine pages before failure represents less than 3 % of that figure — a discrepancy exceeding 97 % from the advertised performance. That is not “variance.” It is false or misleading advertising, and it renders the product not as described under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

I also find your proposed remedy — returning the entire printer — wholly unreasonable. Re-boxing and shipping a unit of this size for an issue that clearly relates only to its consumables is an unnecessary waste of my time. Frankly, I’ve already spent more time corresponding about this than the printer has spent printing.

Equally concerning is the persistent absence of accountability. Not a single message from your side has been signed with a name or position. For a company representing itself as reputable, this anonymous, evasive approach to customer service is remarkable. It gives the impression that whoever is responding either lacks the authority to resolve simple matters or lacks the confidence to attach their name to them. Neither inspires trust.

All I am asking for is the outcome any reasonable customer would expect:

1. Provide a replacement set of LC422 cartridges, or

2. Offer a partial refund equivalent to the cost of a full colour set.

These are fair and lawful remedies for goods sold not as described.

I would much prefer to resolve this directly, efficiently, and professionally. However, should that prove impossible, I will be delighted to escalate the matter through Amazon’s A-to-Z Guarantee and, if necessary, through appropriate consumer channels. I am certain they will view this exchange with the same astonishment I have — that a simple issue concerning ink cartridges has been met with such a complete absence of professionalism.

Kind regards,