From NTL to Sky, is BT line-rental the only one I can have?

girish_2

right i am deffo going this week as we are seeing that solicitor relative of mine this weekend for some asian religious thing and she wanted to be kept updated. so ill let you guys know how it gets on.

girish_2

Sorry its so long, i have detailed exactly what has happened so take your time. ive tried to make it as clear as possible.

ok firstly i was never afraid to go to confront him. i was trying to second guess what to say if he said i was wrong when i said xyz. im in east finchley in london.

Anyway I went to see him today at around 10am 11th aug. what happened is explained below. but to cut a long story short, he did exactly what i expected- claimed he never mis-sold the tv to me and spun things again &my conversation with lg after the meeting:

GOING TO THE SHOP

1) i dont normally swear on my life for anything, but i would do that in the sense that i know for a fact he told me the tv was hd ready when i spoke to him on the phone prior to purchasing the tv and he did so again when me, my mum and dad last went into his shop- when my mum said "weve got a problem the tv is not hd ready" at which point i said "is hd compatible" and he said "its not compatible, its hd ready" and he then preceeded to explain why- hdmi sky hd etc.

...therefore the first thing i said was that he told me the tv was hd ready and showed him the email from lg which stated the tv was hd compatible and not ready. the shop-owner (Adam) then told me that he never told me the tv was hd ready. he claims he told me it was hd compatible. so we argued for a few minutes and he was saying how he would never miss-sell someting and his co-shop worker preceeded to shove a receipt in my face for a tv bought for 2k from someone else saying that the shop doesnt lie to ppl. I realised he was disuputing that so i therefore the 3 requiremenets for a tv to be hd ready was pointless showing him as in his eyes he had always told me the tv was hd compatible.

2) Therefore I then wanted to find out more about the sky hd with hdmi- so showed him the email i got from lg stating that "the tv with its resolution of 852 x 480 does not meet hd ready requirements and so cannot be called hd ready. it will accept a high definition signal and scale it down to 480 lines."

I explained that this correlated to the 1st email i got from lg which stated that "hd compatible will display an hd image, although it will be downscaled due to the inferior resolution.

...This is where things get interesting. As if we now for arguments sake say that the tv is hd compatible and not ready, i showed this to the engineer at the shop...

3) the engineer agreed with the 2 shop owners present. i explained to the engineer about the fact that lg clearly state that the hd image will be downscaled and that if it is downscaled, it is not true or a real hd depiction. He then preceeded to look at the technical data and i told him that sky hd ran on hd resolution-720p minimum. the engineer then saw that the resolution of our tv is 480. i explained to him that because of the low resolution, the hd image viewed could not be true hd as it would be compressed down. he then said i can see what you are saying but look at the componant video output (which stated "YES upto 1080i) and he said 1080i is an hd output. i said yes but thats not the resolution.

...whilst i was talking to the engineer, adam was talking to his co-partner. when i finished talking to the engineer, adam told me "look. all you need is a sky hd box, plug it in through the hdmi port and you will get a TRUE hd image"

I then again referred him to the lg email which stated that the hd image will be downscaled to 480p. adam then said that LG were feeding me "TECHNICAL JARGON." He said that he has had countless disputes with manufacturers with other such issues as "LG DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT." Adam then explained his reasons by saying "ive been in this business for years. it's lg and the media that are spinning terms that confuse people like you. think about it- why would they call the tv hd compatible and for it to have the hdmi, if it then cannot show hd?" He also said that if lg are saying that the hd image would be downscaled to 480, and that you are currently watching 480, then what would be the point of the sky hd or hdmi, if you are viewing the same picture?

* I note at that point that when i said so why are lg lying, he said lg are not lying, it's just they are trying to confuse you. i then said well why not call lg now and sort it out and he said he was busy now but get them to call him and explain to him why he is wrong as he knows he isnt.

4) They then go back to the original point of hd image through sky hd. adam said "i understand your argument but my point is it's all not real. in the sense that until you actually see sky hd and an hd image on your tv, everything you are saying is all matter of fact.

*at this point adam then said that he was taking delivery of a sky hd box next week and that he would come and show me the sky hd preview on my tv and that once i see that i would see that it is a true hd image.

5) I then got adam to confirm exactly what he meant: I said "LG state that hd compatible will display an id image- though DOWNSCALED due to inferior resolution. Are you saying therefore that HD Compatible will take the hd signal AND display a TRUE hd image that IS NOT downscaled?" Adam confirmed that was correct

* I had to be very specific in this as a previous post on here was differentiated between accepting the hd signal vs displaying a true hd image. adam confirmed that not only would my tv accept the signal, but also that it would display a true hd image.

* As i was writing this down on paper, i asked adam for my own reference to sign this to say he has said this. his co-partner then said whats the need for this. this you do when you talk about court etc and theres no need for thiis bullish thing. look, view the sky hd next week and you wont have a problem.

-throughout the course of my time there, adam constantly was talking about how the director of the finchley football club had the same dispute as me, having bought a 50 inch tv and that when they plugged sky hd in with hdmi, it was perfect. no problems. in fact he even said this hd image is better than what i was previously viewing.

***I note that throughout the time, I referred to the resolution of our tv as 852 x 480 and that hd transmits at a minimum of 720p as hd requires 720 minimum. Adam then said "look we dont use these numbers as they confusing and it will confuse you. once you see the hd image through sky hd you will see it is true hd quality

I leave the shop.

PHONE TO LG

I phoned LG to get their advise. fortunately i spoke to the same guy that took me earlier query. he told me that there are 3 ppl in customer services and i know have his name. this is important as will be explained below:

I updated him on the situation and he was laughing with disbelief that adam was claiming that lg were feeding me "technical jargon" and that they "didnt know what they were talking about" he said that it sounds like adam is stubborn and is finding some sort of way to fob you off and that if the guy from lg spoke to him, adam would probably do the same.

The guy at lg done some more research and confirmed that it was lg's mistake when they said in an email that my tv didnt support HDCP as it does. The argument here was about the hd image as whether he told me it was hd ready or compatible is one word against another.

The guy at lg looked at the sky hd handbook and confirmed that my tv could handle it and display an hd image. however the lg guy confirmed that the hd image displayed would be downscaled due to the inferior resoltion. therefore on the settings, i would have no choice but to accept the only 'feed' from sky hd of 720p- the minimum...ie i would not be able to change this to display a true hd image of 1080i.

the guy then explained that perhaps the best thing to do is to view what sky hd looks like next week as (something which was confirmed on this forum earlier, i may get an hd image which looks sufficient enough (may be a good improvement from current image viewed.) He explained that the ideal way was to view sky hd in an hd ready next to sky hd in an hd com but that that would not be possible.

The lg guy then said that adam is wrong when he says that the image will not be downscaled as it will be (because hd requires 720 horizontal lines where my tv has 480) and therefore the higest quality hd image (true hd image according to adam.The LG guy also said to me from what he had found, that a dvd requires 576p and that my resolution is 480 so that even the picture viewed from the dvd would be downscaled.

*i say this as Adam told me "a hd image is a high definition image. therfore hd is hd. there's no in-between. you either have it or you don't"

...my personal view is that adam doesn't seem to understand that you can get an inferior hd image (downscaling) and seems to think that there is only 1 hd. Even if i have got this wrong, he categorically said that lg were feeding me "technical jaron", that lg "didnt know what they were talking about" and even joked that y dont i sue lg then as if the hd compatible with hdmi couldnt accept a true hd image then they are lying as the hdmi logo means it will show the true hd image.

* I was also very clear with adam when he said that viewing sky hd through hdmi with my tv would not show a downscaled hd image, but would show a true hd image. this was because it is clear that hd compatible will show an hd image, though lg claim that this will be an inferior one that will be downscaled, with adam claiming the image will not be downscaled, will not be inferior and will be of true hd quality.

...The lg guy then said for me to look at the sky hd image next week and if i am happy then fine. if i am not then the lg guy would be happy to talk to adam. i wanted this to happen as at least then, if it got to trading standards, i would have confirmation from the guy from lg that what adam is saying is wrong.

*The only thing i am concerned about is like you know how we have gone to retail shops and seen sky hd being shown on hd ready tv's, well is that sky hd preview like a dvd so it will show that same quality as it showed on the tv's in those retail shops, on my hd comp tv or on a standard def tv.


....So to sum up,

* adam says he never told me the tv hd ready, but that it was hd compatible and that it could receive the hd signal. he then went on to say that that signal would be transmitted and displayed in true hd- not any inferior or downscaled one as lg have said

* i quote adam when he says that lg are feeding me "technical jargon" that lg "dont know what they are talking about

I will see what sky hd looks like next week and i am thinking even if is does look ok, i will still get the lg guy to talk to adam and explain why.

girish_2

ok i have spoken to consumer direct who after informing them about the companies involved in the dispute and method of payment, told me the following:

-my case would not be dealt with by trading standards but with a small claims court

-it would seem that the information i provided to the telephone operator led me to have a case.

HOWEVER

- legally i am only entitled to a case if i can prove that the goods were not fit for purpose. In other words even if the shop owner is incorrect and LG are right, legally that is worth nothing to me. This is because the crucial part of the puzzle I need is for the shop owner to confirm that I was looking for the HD Ready tv or a tv that would display a HD image when we bought it from him. Unless I have that in writing, I don't have a case.

-if the shop owner gives you the written information you need, then call back consumer direct. i have been given a reference number and they will tell me the next steps to take. There is no need to pay for a soliciter's letter

-i cannot force the shop owner to put his stance regards the matter in writing




....so armed with this I then called the shop owner. To soften the blow I apologised for the way i behaved the last time I saw him and said that I was not prepared to be piggy in the middle and therefore as I had LG's perspective in emails I wanted his stance on the matter in writing. He asked what I wanted exactly in writing, I said simply that we were looking for a tv that would display a true HD image and that the tv you sold us did that. Basically what he told me last week- when I met him.

I then said I could email him what I wanted him to put in writing and he said no there's no need, come to the shop and I will put whatever you need in writing for you. He said he was busy this week so I have arranged to meet him 10am Monday 21st August 2006.

He then asked again what exactly I wanted from last week to put in writing and I said 'well what you told me. That we were looking for a tv that would display an HD image and that my tv is HD Compatible, will receive the HD signal and display a true HD image- not one which is downscaled or inferior.' He said ok come next week and I will get that done for you.

I have written down what I intend to type and show him and ask him to put the following in writing:




"Girish and his family were looking for a television that would display a true HD image. The television we sold him (LG 42 inch plasma 42PX3RVA) fits that purpose. It is HD Compatible, will receive an HD signal and display a true HD image- which is not downscaled or inferior.

In order for Girish to view the true HD display on his television, all he needs to do is to purchase Sky HD (as Sky HD is the only method of currently displaying HD content) and attach the box to his television's HDMI port via. a cable that can be bought."



....NOW THIS IS WHERE I NEED SOME ADVICE. Obviously the crux of my case now hinges on him putting in writing the fact that we were looking for a tv which would display an HD image.


1)...The shop owner did not ask me what I was going to do with the writing he was going to give me. What should I say if he asks me that question? I don't want to say anything like court or a consumer watchdog as he may then not be as generous as to write what I want him to. Would I get away with it if I were to say I will get LG's take on the matter as I will be able to compare two written statements, one from you and one from LG. Then it'll be easier to assess the situation for me, as I am having to recall verbally what you told me.

2) I need the shop owner to confirm that initial sentence in the above, that we were looking for a tv that would display a true HD image. If he asks me why I need this or says oh you don't need that...I can't exactly say 'yes i do because I can then sue you.'

So would I get away with it by approaching him with what I have written down and saying something like:

"Hey thanks for doing this for me. You know it's funny as I was reading LG's email and they were contradictory too. Anyway I've wrote down very simply what I need you to confirm in writing- it's exactly what you confirmed to me last week so once you've signed it, I will do so too."

...If he asks about the bit about why he needs to write that we wanted the HD display, could I get away with saying to him:

"well it states what you told me last week and the situation. It protects you as your position about the tv being able to display a true HD image and it protects me as it shows that what you sold us was exactly what we were looking for- a tv that was able to do what you are saying it will do- display a true HD image."

...do you think he would get twitchy if I talk about protecting myself etc. I think I've written the above in such a way that it would appear that he would believe that it would prove that he had not mis-led us when he sold it.



One way or the other, I will know on Monday whether I will have to keep the tv and treat the episode as a learning experience or know that I have a case and will take it on.

girish_2

ok guys you are not going to believe what just happened. (if u cant b asked to read all of it, the bottom of the pages list by options now:)

1)went to shop with the written statement:

"Girish and his family were looking for a television that would display a true HD image. The television we sold them (LG 42 inch plasma 42PX3RVA) fitted that purpose when we sold it to them, as it does now. It is HD Compatible, will receive an HD signal and display a true HD image- which is not downscaled or inferior.

In order for Girish to view the true HD display on his television, all he needs to do is to purchase Sky HD (as Sky HD is the only method of currently displaying HD content) and attach the box to his television's HDMI port via. a cable that can be bought."

...the first thing Adam (guy that sold it to us) said was that he had spoken to his business partner (the guy who shoved the recepit in my face last time I was there for your reference) and that he was not prepared to sign anything.

I asked why, a LG had backed up their claims in an email stating their point. The fact that he was not prepared to do the same indicates to me that he is not prepared to back his stance up. Adam then said there has to be a degree of trust between himself as he sold the tv and to us.

Adam went on to say that once I see the Sky HD preview image on my television, that that would show me it would display true HD. I explained that LG said that even though the image may be better than currently viewed, it would not be by much. Furthermore than if it displayed the so called hd image at 480 lines, which it would have to do, then that displayed image would not be HD at all (as HD requires minimum of 720,) or at the very least it would certainly be a downscaled version of HD.

Adam went back to what he always said- manufacturers and him disagree on issues and that i am WASTING MY TIME/SPENDING TOO MUCH TIME RESEARCHING THIS, when the image seen from preview sky hd would show me it's HD- again LG counter this by what they have told me in emails.

Before I went, I asked Adam to give me one good reason as to why he was not prepared to put his stance in writing. I THEN SHOWED HIM WHAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN (ABOVE) AND HE SAID YES ALL OF THIS IS CORRECT. He then went on to say that because my tv has an HDMI port, it will display a true HD image. He referred to a tv that he is selling which was hd compatible but didnt have the hdmi port, so could not display a true hd image with sky hd. Adam said that when LG referred to a downscaled HD display, that plasmas scaling capabilities were increasing all the time so that his plasma of 3 years does not scale at what it did.

I then spoke on the phone to adam's business parter and he fed me the lines of the fact that he has loads of invoices and is registered on VAT etc and it's his company and they sold the tv etc so I had to trust him. I state, he did not give me any satisfactory reason as to why he was not prepared to sign his stance. He went on to say exactly what Adam said, view the image and it will be HD. He stated it was nothing to do with company policy as to why he was not prepared to put in writing his stance. IT SEEMS THE ONLY REASON HE COULD GIVE WAS THAT THEY SOLD THE TV, THE BUSINESS HAS HAD NO TROUBLE SINCE IT STARTED, I WAS NOT A FOOL FOR LOOKING TO BUY THERE AND THAT AS THEY SOLD IT THERE HAD TO BE TRUST.

He then said why are you speaking to LG, why not speak to Sky as they made the HD box. I then said ok I will do....WHICH IS WHAT I DID DO WHEN I GOT HOME...

2) Sky's technical adviser (Thomas Farrer) said that unfortunately they could not put anything in writing as the query was specific to my television and that they don't deal with tv's so don't put anything in writing for legal reasons.

Nonetheless I explained my situation and, after looking up the tv's technical info in the internet, he said basically that LG were correct and that my situation aisde, he would listen to the leading manufacturers over a local seller anyday.

He said that even though i could input sky hd box at 720p (BACKED UP BY WHAT ANDY? SAID AT LG- THE GUY I SPOKE TO, CANT REMEMBER NAME AT MO.) Thomas said that it didnt matter what sky hd inputed at, what mattered was your tv's resolution and that determines whether the tv was physically capable of displaying the signal fed to it.

Thomas said that my tv was hd compatible, so would display an hd picture from an hd source. hd ready meant it would not downscale that picture.

in other words, even though in my case, hdmi would connect the box and receive the hd signal, that signal would lead to a downscaled hd display. this was a fact because my resolution could not cope with what it was being fed- 720 lines (could only accept 720.)

Thomas said that my tv's resolution did not have enough pixels to to HD justice and therefore the display on my tv when using sky hd would definately be downscaled or would not display any form of hd image.

He said this has been the difficulty with compatible and ready, with compatible meaning it has the requirements to display an hd image HOWEVER it would be a downscaled one- whereas in ready it wouldnt be.

Thomas finished by saying that he would be happy to talk to Adam and explain why the tv would display a true hd image.

....3) so then go back to Adam and explain this.

He said to me "I don't want to talk to Sky. I don't need to. I have already told you once you see the sky hd preview, i would see it would be true hd, not downscaled." He went on to tell me a story of how there have been 5 occassions where his technical staff have had to install sky boxes because they sky engineer didnt know how to. THIS WAS A CHEAP POP AT SKY. Nonetheless he ended up saying again how I "had been doing too much research and that I was now beginning to FRUSTRATE/IRRITATE him. I said well I am frustrated too as you told me to speak to Sky and now you are not prepared to listen to what they say, just the same as when I spoke to LG."


.....

4)got home and spoke to consumer direct. they told me it might be harder to prove it with just verbal but that it was now down to me. Giving me a few choices:

......They told me of the CONSUMER CREDIT ACT Section 75 1974.It apparantly shows that the credit card company are liable for transactions made by using a credit card and that I could explain to them that the goods were sold are not as they were described. The credit card company could then speak to Adam.

........I could contact LG and use the opposite route- ie telling them that i may not have enough grounds to prove in writing that the tv was not fit for purpose at point of sale, but that Adam stuck to his point at the point of sale and has done so ever since, upto this point. Therefore he is miselling LG's television.

......I explained that my relative was a practicing solicitor and that she would be happy to draft a latter threatening legal action. of course how far it goes i dont know. he said i could do that but i could always draft a letter myself to avoid fees.

....ONE THING I HAVE CONSIDERED IS...contacting BBC Watchdog that tv programme. i notice their new series starts in october so could always use their query thingy to express my position

....or forget the whole thing, maybe write Adam a latter saying that i know he is wrong and that i dont need the satisfaction from a court of law to prove this to myself and to all other major players/related parties involved in this dispute. i dont know if i would say that i have made my situation known to many people and want him to know that i would not recommend his shop to anyone...bit risky as he could then tru and sue me for bringing his name into disrepute.

...Im going to call my solicitor relative again to get her view.if i have more than a good chance to win the case i am prepared to take him to court. certainly im prepared to contact watchdog as WHAT ANNOYS ME MORE ISNT THE FACT THAT I WAS NAIVE OR THE FACT THAT HE IS DISPUTING LG'S CLAIMS, ITS ITS IGNORANCE IN THE WAY HE HANDLED THEM. Let me give you a few eg.s

- lg are feeding you technical jargon
-lg dont know what theyre talking about
-get lg to explain to me why it wont display a true hd image (which i did and even then he disputed it)
-speak to sky (which i did and then he refused to speak to them when they practically agreed with lg)

girish_2

yeh i did get the name of the guy at LG. i dont wana post it as it may implicate my position if it gets as far as court. i will say that he works in customer services and i spoke to him on 2/3 occassions. previous to him, i also spoke to someone else at customer services who collobarated what he told me.

i also have the name of the person i spoke to in Sky's technical department. not naming him for same reasons.

dont know if i took the names of the 2 ppl i spoke to at consumer direct but i have a reference number so ppl can look at my notes etc

Difficult to get their points in writing though due to legal reasons as its specific to my situation and not their general/standard email stance. However I have names and phone numbers.

....thought about it a bit more and what i forgot to mention was that consumer direct told me to mention to the credit card company if i contact them , that i had no reason to doubt Adam as as naive as i was, i had no reason to doubt him. in fact technically, he has stuck to his stance all along with the tv displaying a true hd image.

dont know if i mentioned it but trading standards do not deal with my kind of case, thats for a small claims court. like i said b4 i think he has been closed down b4 or relocated but am not sure as to why.

When I said that the only way to test if it was true hd display would be to view side by side sky hd in my tv with one in hd ready tv...would you believe their response was to BUY ANOTHER PLASMA AND TEST IT YOURSELF!- TALK ABOUT CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

....i was going to do that regards to LG Loz but was unsure who to speak to.

Phone
0870 873 5454: Customer Service
0870 872 1221: Spares and accessories
01753 491 500: Reception
01753 491 628: PR Manager
020 7611 3500: PR Agency

OFFICE LOCATIONS
Head Office : LG House, 250 Bath Road,
Slough, Berkshire, SL1 4DX
Tel. 01753 491 500

I dont want to speak to customer services as what else could they do but say that their position was not what has been said to me and that it is not what Adam is saying. I can't see a legal department so maybe the PR dept is the best bet but I know how busy and not they are having specialised in PR. Having said that if i were LG's press officer id wanna no if someone was putting my company into disrepute.i think if i had spoken to a solicitor, consumer direct,lg and sky, then lg's pr dept would know how serious this matter was and that i wouldnt be going to all this trouble if i didnt feel someone was telling me porkier.

Court is the last step but I am thinking if I should show BBC Watchdog my case and say that I am reluctant to take it to court as he may lie and is refusing to back him claims up in writing, which he can do, though has given no satisfactory reason as to why etc. I am just wary as the longer it goes on, the less chance I may have a full refund etc. so that in that sense i dont need a court of law to prove im right and its a risk if it just verbals and this forum etc

I will get advice from my solicitor as to whether the consumer credit act could be worth looking at and then will prob most likely contact lg. only problem is they sent me an email saying i would have to put in writing my claim for them to look at it further they cant email it! thats why maybe customer services will be lengthy and pointless.

..................
In many ways what id love to do is to get confirmation that its a big risk taking him to court as its verbal and leave it as it is. i could then get my solicitor to threaten legal action or say we are considering taking my case to bbcs watchdog or that we will speak to lg's pr dept etc....then i could write a letter back to him saying i dont need court to prove im right etc and how he is very ignorant by telling me to get confirmation from lg and then him dismissing it. calling lg liers?mmm...mind u i would have to be carreful as i dont want him suing me for bringing his name into disrepute.

at this point id better state that i am not claiming that lg or adam or sky are lying. i simply want to find out what my exact and true position is on the matter, whether i have been mis-sold a product or whether lg should be more aware of their definitions.

girish_2

ok this situation is now closed as far as I am concerned. I just let it go. For all the updates see:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=210816&page=2

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=367882

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=405316

the shop in question is

Shantel Av Ltd
11-13 Long Lane Finchley
London N3 2PR
Tel: 020 8371 6671
Email: info@shantelav.co.uk
http://www.shantelav.co.uk/

peter999

Christ, these are long posts.

Not sure people have time to read & work out what's going on.

peter999

girish_2

lol well i started off the topic about the tv midway through this topic as i was sure i could get the full sky hd. then i could not find a tv only area on this so went to the avforum.

people that have followed it know what i was going on about lol.

in short, if you want to buy a high def tv, make sure you don't do what I do! Trust me reading through all the posts will be less painful than making the stupid decision we did!

Birmo0803

mobilegossip wrote: »

But bear in mind that it is expected that Sky will offer FREE Broadband themselves in the near future.

nothing is free, + the sky BB is !!!!. 2mb download speed and 2gb month usage. Pathetic.

jhp

Birmo0803 wrote: »

nothing is free, + the sky BB is !!!!. 2mb download speed and 2gb month usage. Pathetic.

Whats the point in digging out an old thread and referring to a comment posted in 2006 when the poster would not have known what the offer would be?

Also its no longer free unless you take Sky Talk.