I brought a ‘new-other’ Reebok treadmill from a small business via eBay (buy it now, not auction) on 15 August 2012 for £260 plus £48 delivery. When the treadmill arrived, the belt was half off and my brother in law had a friend called out to help him put it back on again (which subsequently cost me £50). I contacted the seller and told them what had happened and that I had to pay someone to put the belt on and after months of chasing, had the £40 reimbursed. In November 2012 I contacted the seller again regarding an issue with the wheels, and that if the problem couldn’t be resolved; I intended to return the product. They responded saying that the year’s guarantee I got with the product was no longer applicable as someone had put the belt back on! Which is rubbish because I still have my statutory rights. Since August, I have used the treadmill twice for around 15 minutes each time (what I waste, I know!) and my brother in law took it to his house on 23/02/2013 to get some use from it. He phoned me in the evening saying that the treadmill is completely useless and that the motor is out of alignment which is subsequently causing the belt to come off. As a result it is burning the rubber which is obviously very dangerous. It appears as though this has been the fault from the very start. I have since applied to take the seller to a small claims court and I'm confident based on the time span that is reasonable for such a product and that it is not fit for purpose, I will be successful. The help I need is an example of a case where a buyer has successfully taken a seller to court following the sale of faulty goods and failure to consider the buyers statutory rights. I have snippets from the Sale of Goods Act 1979 but what I really require is a real life example of this scenario. I would be most grateful for any comments regarding this matter. Many thanks - Nje