Demanding a replacement rather then refund

[The Family Cyclist]

Afternoon. Don't know if anyone knows but basically we bought a cooker. Somewhere in the loading and delivering it was damaged as in frame bent. It was assessed by the manufacturerbwho said not repairable. It was ex display but listed as new on invoice. Colour is NLA. The shop have said we can have money back or pay extra for replacement as they did do us a reduced price to clear discontinued colour. I'm refusing and saying I want it replaced for the original amount. Where do I stand?

[PaulF]

I think that it's at the seller's discretion. From https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act

Under the Consumer Rights Act you have a legal right to reject goods that are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, and get a full refund - as long as you do this quickly.

And - although this may not apply as I assume that you're within the 30 days.

If you are outside the 30-day right to reject, you have to give the retailer one opportunity to repair or replace any goods or digital content which are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described.

You can state your preference, but the retailer can normally choose whichever would be cheapest or easier for it to do.

[rafletcher]

I'd say that the refund is what you're entitled to under the consumer rules, and not a replacement, especially of an item no longer stocked / available.

[Valiant]

Full refund.

[chrisbainbridge]

I would have a discussion and ask if you could split the difference between what you paid and the new version.

[De Sisti]

Take the refund. They did you a favour in the first place. There are other retailers selling cookers.

[The Family Cyclist]

I'm taking the refund and will be spending it elsewhere. There was no offer of a half way and the price they offered the new one at was about par, could find elsewhere cheaper.

[Paul H]

I'm taking the refund and will be spending it elsewhere. There was no offer of a half way and the price they offered the new one at was about par, could find elsewhere cheaper.

That's a shame, but in their defence they may be caught in the middle, it could be they got the old stock cheap and offering a replacement is in effect subsidising your cooker, even so I'd have thought they could offer something as goodwill.  As you've already had some dealings with the manufacturer might it be worth appealing the their goodwill?  You know the sort of thing, how you'd been looking forward to having one of their cookers, how the delay has caused all sorts of inconvenience...
I'm pretty sure in the first 30 days your only option was to reject.  I've only dealt with similar in a commercial capacity, the rejection terminates the contract unless negotiated otherwise.  You can then pursue them for any losses that result - I've been on the wrong end of that, supplier is liable even if the failure was due to another party.