Usual rubbish from suppliers then. Sucks. Wish there was some comeback on faulty parts.

There is some comeback on faulty parts it is up to the suplier to have the part looked at and if it hasnt been abused they have a right to replace the part its called "costomer rights"

Recently fast-lad have gone up in my estimations, dealing with some difficult situations and customers very well, and in some cases they have publicly gone above and beyond the call of duty. It's a shame they have chosen to take their not inconsiderable amount of profit on this one and tell you to do one. I saw this happen on its second flight, and in no way was it damaged before hand, so surely the retailer is wholly responsible for this one?

Who was the supplier. Looks like faulty goods to me

I'd put up a bit of fight. Tail looks pretty clean except for the sheared main shaft. So unlikely that it has had any impact. You also have at least one witness and have rights according to the sale of goods act. For FL to be cautious is probably sensible as they dont want every crashed heli to be returned as faulty goods. But i think given the circumstances, they would have a good case for returning it to Align (who should be interested for quality of components!)

Sorry for your loss ,, It really is sicking to think align and other companys can sell these helis with these S--T parts and then leave you with a huge repair bill because of there lack of workmanship ,,, you would have think align would have double and tripple checked the first run of kits with their track history but it looks like they are back to there old tricks I hope you get the heli and situation sorted soon

Well I am going to pursue this further, I'm not after a replacement heli just the cost of the repair around £150.00, I don't think that's unreasonable at all. Letters will be going out on Monday...

I must point out that the supplier did say they would replace the faulty tail shaft but the rest of the parts damaged as a direct result of the faulty shaft was down to me, that makes it all right then, I don't think so.

Know one sold anything in bad faith, even align cannot know that this would happen or prevent it, shit happens old boy...hope you get it back in the air soon.....

If they have agreed to replace the "faulty" tail shaft, that's an admission of fault, and as such surely all subsequent damage should be covered???

Not nice to see. I not heard of this happening for some time on the Align's.

Would that admission have to come from Align tho and not the supplier? (what do they know?) I think you'll be lucky to get anything. Too easy for them to turn around and say you done something like tighten the grub screws too tight or some other such crap. The supplier surely would only replace all damaged parts if the manufacturer or distributor agreed to cover the costs and seeing as its Align you don't stand a chance

Nothing ventured, nothing gained...

To the end consumer it makes no odds who is at fault, remember that your contract is with your supplier, ie the retailer, NOT the distributer or manufacturer!

I had a dodgy tail with lots of vibes align trex.co.uk changed mine no problems

'Bad faith' isn't a requirement, all that is needed is a part that was defective at the time it was sold to the customer. Neither the manufacturer nor the retailer need to know it was faulty, it merely has to be faulty.

The sooner after sale that it fails the stronger the balance in favour of the customer and the more the retailer would have to do to prove it was not faulty.

What the retailer manages to get out of the distributor isn't relevant to the customer and certainly plays no part in the remedy available to the customer. The retailer is fully responsible for the products they sell. Many would like you to believe otherwise and many will do their utmost to convince you that it is not their responsibility to fix it, but if it was faulty at the point you bought it from them they are indeed responsible.

It is a reasonably foreseeable consequence that other parts could be damaged by the failure of a critical part like a tail shaft, so replacement of the other parts is not an unreasonable request.

Balance this with the possibility that the fault could have been induced by incorrect assembly or use. If this was the case then nothing is due, but if the nature of the fault is such that it could have been a faulty component then you are due full replacement of all damaged parts.

It isn't always possible to be certain what broke first and caused the crash vs what broke in the crash so we do owe it to the retailers to be sure about what we are claiming before dumping in all at their door, but sometimes it will be a faulty part and they should not just try to duck when that is the case ...