UPDATE: In UK Consumer Law, there are three major points coverd by the term "Statutory Rights", which overrule ALL Terms & Conditions. I think two of them apply to this case.
2-IT IS WHAT YOU EXPECTED?
Secondly, if you have bought something on the basis of the seller’s description or a sample, you should expect the item to conform exactly to that description or sample. If it does not, you have the right to reject the goods, demand a full refund and possibly claim damages. This is still the case even where you have selected or examined the items for yourself before buying them.
3-SATISFACTORY QUALITY
Satisfactory quality is defined as what a ‘reasonable person’ would regard as acceptable, and takes into account factors such as price paid, fitness for purpose specified, appearance and finish, freedom from minor blemishes, safety and durability. If it becomes apparent that an item is not of the quality you were led to expect, you were not aware of any such defect when you bought it, and you bought from a seller acting ‘in the course of a business’ (i.e. not an informal sale), you are quite within your rights to go back to the retailer, even after some months of use. If a product develops a fault within the first 6 months, the assumption will be that this defect was present at the time of purchase and you will not have to prove anything. If you are returning an item after this 6 month time period, this automatic assumption does not apply, and it may be up to you to prove the fault did not occur through misuse. You should also consider aspects of durability and acceptance.
So, basically, Richard's (?) obsession with his Terms & Conditions means nothing.