What is a "reasonable time" for goods (fridge) to be repaired.

cjakit

Hi All,
I have a Samsung Fridge/Freezer (RSH1NHMH) purchased from Comet that has about 2 months to go before the end of its 24 month warranty. We noticed on the 4th June that it had stopped working (not cooling/freezing at all) and so on the 6th June arranged with Comet to have an engineer sent around on 10th June who diagnosed a faulty compressor. Another engineer arrived on the 15th to fit the new compressor but is unable to because the pipework is of a different size. He thinks that he can rectify the problem on another visit (probably 17th June).
I have since spoken to Comet to register my concern at being kept so long without a fridge/freezer indicating that I thought they had to repair or replace the item within a reasonable time.
I assumed that nearly two weeks and two attempted repairs was a reasonable timeframe but the lady I spoke to indicated that by law they had 28 days to effect a repair. Is this correct? Before I continue my grievance I would like to have my facts straight. What would be my best course of action assuming the repair in two days' time is unsuccessful? Should I preempt this repair with a communication to Comet's Complaints department?

many thanks,
Chris.

deanos

I would say 28 days for an essential piece of equipment is not reasonable, its not like we are talking about a toaster here, but if im correct i dont know , im sure someone will be along soon who does

mc33033

cjakit wrote: »

Hi All,
the lady I spoke to indicated that by law they had 28 days to effect a repair. Is this correct?

No this is not correct. The "law" that the lady may be talking about is probably their own policy which probably does state 28 days. The legislation - SOGA 1979 states "significant inconvenience" being the issue. If you are student and only have the fridge for beer then clearly it will not be so inconvenient for you as a large family who have a baby twins being bottle fed and have all the night time feeds in the fridge to save making them up at 3am and the nearest shop being 15 miles away for fresh milk.

If they can't repair without causing significant inconvenience then they should offer a like for like replacement is what the SOGA states. You have to argue the case like I have above for SI. You might as well fire off a letter to the CS people now to move your case forward.

Antispam

But to a student having a fridge for your beer is the utmost importance 2nd to having a defecting ipo or a hob to cook you value beans in and tesco's value curry sauce

mc33033 wrote: »

No this is not correct. The "law" that the lady may be talking about is probably their own policy which probably does state 28 days. The legislation - SOGA 1979 states "significant inconvenience" being the issue. If you are student and only have the fridge for beer then clearly it will not be so inconvenient for you as a large family who have a baby twins being bottle fed and have all the night time feeds in the fridge to save making them up at 3am and the nearest shop being 15 miles away for fresh milk.

If they can't repair without causing significant inconvenience then they should offer a like for like replacement is what the SOGA states. You have to argue the case like I have above for SI. You might as well fire off a letter to the CS people now to move your case forward.

Leebobs

Just adding to what mc33033 stated: As the fault developed within two years you also have European Directive 1999/44/EC to fall back on.

This was brought into UK law by the The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 which amended the Sale of Goods Act 1979.

mc33033 is absolutely correct Section 48B(2) of the Act (As amended) states:
(a) repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;

"significant inconvenience" is a matter of fact for the Court to determine and depends on the circumstances of the individual case.

I would write to there customer service section setting out the "significant inconvenience" which is being caused and asking them to repair the item within 5 working days or provide you with a replacement within that timescale.

I should add that Section 48B(5) gives guidance on how significant inconvenience is to be determined:

(5) Any question as to what is a reasonable time or significant inconvenience is to be determined by reference to—
(a) the nature of the goods, and
(b) the purpose for which the goods were acquired.

Leebobs

derrick

Leebobs wrote: »

Just adding to what mc33033 stated: As the fault developed within two years you also have European Directive 1999/44/EC to fall back on.

This was brought into UK law by the The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 which amended the Sale of Goods Act 1979.

Not true!

From THE SALE AND SUPPLY OF GOODS TO CONSUMERS REGULATIONS 2002

Pages 12 & 13; -
"The Regulations do not provide a two-year guarantee. This was a myth that seemed to grow out of a mention in the Directive that Member States had to give their consumers a two-year limitation period.

The limitation periods in the UK are the periods within which this type of legal
proceedings must be commenced: namely six years in England, Wales and Northern
Ireland; and five years from discovery in Scotland. These are, therefore, already
longer than the Directive’s two years and are quite different from a guarantee period.

This does mean that throughout the EU there is a requirement that all retailers will
honour the four stages of remedy that have been outlined above (repair,replacement,
partial refund or full refund) for at least two years. However, as this does not cover
fair wear and tear, and since the consumer has to prove the lack of conformity for
most of the period, this cannot be called a “guarantee”.