Samsuns TV broken within warranty, want replacement!

SFA_AOK

Hi,

We bought a Samsung TV nearly a year ago. A couple of months ago it developed a fault - we called Samsung and they told us to take it to a repair centre to fix the problem.

2 and a half weeks later - yesterday! - we picked it up, got it home and indeed, the problem had been solved. However, after a few hours, the TV went really screwy - the first fault was a small defect, this new one renders the TV unwatchable! - and I'm going to have to call Samsung again.

I've now got no faith in this TV and don't want it repaired and want a new one. When I picked the TV up from the repair centre, the guy said it would have been cheaper to replace the entire TV but Samsung have a policy of repairing 3 times before replacing.

What are people's thoughts on the best way to go about this? I'm especially worried as it's nearing the end of the warranty. I don't want to have to wait another two weeks to get my TV back for it to be out of warranty when the next problem occurs (I'm told the work extends the warranty or the work itself is covered for an additional 3 months). What are my rights? And because I've had it repaired, does this remove going to the retailer as an option?

Thanks in advance for any replies!

savemoney

http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html


Key Facts:

• Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).
• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.
• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.
• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.
• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)
• 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
• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).
• If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty)

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Something doesnt add up.

It became faulty a few months ago but you only got it repaired 2 weeks ago.

Thus the fact the warranty is about to end and you dont want to send it back is your own fault.

As for remedies - Samsung are only bound by the terms of the warranty.

The retailer are bound by the SOGA but if they wanted to fix it you would need to accept this.

Chances of getting a new TV or refund is non existent unless thats what they want to do.

MilkyJoe

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

Something doesnt add up.

It became faulty a few months ago but you only got it repaired 2 weeks ago.

Thus the fact the warranty is about to end and you dont want to send it back is your own fault.

As for remedies - Samsung are only bound by the terms of the warranty.

The retailer are bound by the SOGA but if they wanted to fix it you would need to accept this.

Chances of getting a new TV or refund is non existent unless thats what they want to do.

It got picked up 2 1/2 weeks ago.

4743hudsonj

the magic number is three repairs before replacement in most cases

ask for a warranty on the repair though

or take out the extended warranty so when/ if there is another fault you can then get a replacement

Poppy9

Even after the TV is 12 months old you have rights under SOGA which doesn't specify a 12 month period anywhere. It only mentions reasonable time. How you judge reasonable will be in relation to the price paid and the product. If you pay £5 for an electric kettle then 12 months might be reasonable but if you pay £40 you would think you are buying better quality so 12 months is not reasonable.

savemoney

True it would be reasonable to expect a tv of any make to last several years more so for a branded one

But it may be unreasonable to expect a new one, but rather a repair or replacement or equivalent price/quality

Poppy9 wrote: »

Even after the TV is 12 months old you have rights under SOGA which doesn't specify a 12 month period anywhere. It only mentions reasonable time. How you judge reasonable will be in relation to the price paid and the product. If you pay £5 for an electric kettle then 12 months might be reasonable but if you pay £40 you would think you are buying better quality so 12 months is not reasonable.

Poppy9

savemoney wrote: »

True it would be reasonable to expect a tv of any make to last several years more so for a branded one

But it may be unreasonable to expect a new one, but rather a repair or replacement or equivalent price/quality

Agree about demanding a new one. I think if I remember my law studies correctly (it was a long time ago:o) that even within 12 months they can make a deduction for the use you have had of a product. So if an item should last 36 months and you've used for 6 months you get 6/36th deducted from refund or a cost towards replacement.

moonrakerz

Poppy9 wrote: »

you have rights under SOGA which doesn't specify a 12 month period anywhere.

Sorry Poppy but - PLEASE read SOGA before you make this sort of misleading statement.

You are absolutely correct, SOGA doesn't mention a 12 month period. Under this Act your "guarantee" is actually 6 months NOT 12 !!. In fact, if the retailer can prove that what he supplied did "conform" you have NO guarantee at all under this Act.
"If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract"

SOGA gives you the right (nothing else - it doesn't promise anything) to claim damages after this point - but you have to prove that the item was of faulty design or manufacture !
It may be reasonable to expect an "average" TV to last for x years, but some will last 2 or 3 times that long, some will fail after 13 days or 13 months. That does not make those that fail early "not fit for purpose".
If that were to be the case then surely the retailer would be justified in asking for more money from you, if your TV lasted for say 2x years and not just x years !


savemoney has posted a link above to the BERR website this is a good precis of what the Act actually says.

Poppy9

moonrakerz wrote: »

Sorry Poppy but - PLEASE read SOGA before you make this sort of misleading statement.

You are absolutely correct, SOGA doesn't mention a 12 month period. Under this Act your "guarantee" is actually 6 months NOT 12 !!. In fact, if the retailer can prove that what he supplied did "conform" you have NO guarantee at all under this Act.
"If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract"

SOGA gives you the right (nothing else - it doesn't promise anything) to claim damages after this point - but you have to prove that the item was of faulty design or manufacture !
It may be reasonable to expect an "average" TV to last for x years, but some will last 2 or 3 times that long, some will fail after 13 days or 13 months. That does not make those that fail early "not fit for purpose".
If that were to be the case then surely the retailer would be justified in asking for more money from you, if your TV lasted for say 2x years and not just x years !


savemoney has posted a link above to the BERR website this is a good precis of what the Act actually says.

I don't feel I did make a misleading statement. I said

Even after the TV is 12 months old you have rights under SOGA which doesn't specify a 12 month period anywhere.

As I said you still have "rights" under SOGA.

From the link posted:

• 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).
• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).
• After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

The point of my post was that most people assume that a store/supplier says "you have 12 months guarantee" that in month 13 if an item fails they are stuffed, whereas they are not, they have the same rights under SOGA that they had at the end of month 6. The 12 month guarantee offered by a store is in addition to your SOGA rights but it cannot replace them.

As I said though it is dependant on the price paid and the product.:

• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

savemoney

The problem arises after 12 months usually as most appliances have a 12 month guarantee which is not law just a guarantee by the manufacturer which the shop normally adheres too. Its then up to the individual to prove that the goods have an inherent fault