TV Stopped working 3.5 years later.. Replacement/Refund?

DX-SFX

Even if goods are out of a guarantee period, the law says there is an implicit expectation that they should last a reasonable length of time. No one would expect to buy a £1000 TV every two years if it goes splut a week after the guarantee period is up. This is well excepted and a good starting point for you to begin negotiations. You won't get a full refund so don't push for that unreasonably but you should get something.

roddydogs

Dont forget a "Cheap" 32" is now about £250.

davetrousers

Percy1983 wrote: »

on the 10/15/05.

When is the 15th month?

derrick

davetrousers wrote: »

When is the 15th month?

That will be the American, (and others), version, i.e. 15th October!

Percy1983

I am an accountant myself and don't think 4 years applys to a TV, 4 years is more aimed at computers which do go out of date quicker, but some companies do use longer depending how long theu deem it to be useful.

Am I really wrong in thinking it should last longer, £200 a year for a TV seems a bit steep to me.

I am not after a free upgrade and don't expect a great TV to replace it, a generic 32" LCD now will be slightly better now.

I think i will aim for £150-£250 and see how far I get.

Would it be wise to just go to the store I bought it from and have a chat with them, I am not going to be the annoying "I know the law, I want this" type and make a scene

Would it be wise to just go with my receipt first and try and agree I something with the manager rather than turning up with the TV?

Are they more likely to help if I am nice about it or should I go all guns blazing?

Basically I am going with the idea of anything back is better than nothing.

stugib

Percy1983 wrote: »

I think i will aim for £150-£250 and see how far I get.
...
Basically I am going with the idea of anything back is better than nothing.

Personally, I think you're jumping the gun a bit. In my reading of the SOGA partial refund is available if repair/replacement is not cost effective:

BERR_website wrote:

• For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).
• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.
• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

If you've not even gone to see them about this yet, then I think you're taking the most difficult course of action - getting cold, hard cash back from them - and would be going in on shaky ground legally.

Percy1983

True, good point, will see if they are willing to repair or replace first. As far as a replacemtn goes I will accept any TV of the same size really so they may be able to offer that.

So its,
Repair
Replace
Refund

I would be happier with the first 2 really, as mentioned I just want this TV working or a similar one for the least possible cost to myself which i am sure you can all understand.

Thanks for the help so far, you have all given me some good advice and different view points which have helped me decided what to ask for.

stugib

Percy1983 wrote: »

So its,
Repair
Replace
Refund

It's more like:
[Repair/Replace] - at retailer's choice usually.
Then Partial refund.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

You will get nothing and rightly so.

The SOGA means to be entitled to anything at all you would have to get an engineers report stating that the fault was either inherent or that it was unreasonable for it to last such a short time.

3.5 years is a fairly decent amount of time for a budget TV and whilst it could be argued it would be expected to last longer I would be amazed if any engineer will state that it is inherently faulty or unreasonable that it didnt.

Also as it was a budget brand even if they agree to pay anything - which they wont it will be absolute peanuts (i.e less than 50 quid)

Percy1983

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

You will get nothing and rightly so.

The SOGA means to be entitled to anything at all you would have to get an engineers report stating that the fault was either inherent or that it was unreasonable for it to last such a short time.

3.5 years is a fairly decent amount of time for a budget TV and whilst it could be argued it would be expected to last longer I would be amazed if any engineer will state that it is inherently faulty or unreasonable that it didnt.

Also as it was a budget brand even if they agree to pay anything - which they wont it will be absolute peanuts (i.e less than 50 quid)

As much as I can agree with this, the old saying of you don't get if you don't try comes to mind.

I still don't see how 3.5 years is a reasonable time, this is the shortest life of any TV I have know across, a good few friends and family. Budget or not that isn't long enough. I am aware they may just say 'prove it'. On the Flip side the dixons group isn't exactly small and as a company would like to be seen to do the right thing.

The end of the day if I get £50 its worth asking the question.

Do I have anything to lose is the question?

It does scare me how many people think 3.5 years for a TV is acceptable, If I bought a £250 replacement right now I would expect longer, personally if it made it to 5 years then I wouldn't be amused but I could accept it, but right now I do genuinely feel short changed on its service life.