PC World - Sale of Goods

dEfEndEr_2

Then I've got to sign a returns form that states

'i agree to cover any costs for the repair...' <can't recall the rest of the junk on their returns form> but it did state for parts/labor not covered by the warrenty (of which there is none)

Errr, NO.. I wont..

Patrick20

I agree with the OP of this one. It was less than 5 months old and you are well within your rights to ask for a new one. 28 days is a fifth of the time they have had the product and thats is how long they are expected to be without it with no guaruntee that the fault will be sufficiently repaired?

And are they wanting you to pay for this service if you do get it? Even if you werent covered by the sale of good act then you surely would be under warranty for atleast a year by the manufacturer who would replace it?

PHYTHIAN

Defender...what does the rest of that point say. I would think it's something along the lines of........' if it is proven to be of the customer's own doing' , Of course they can't charge you if it's a fault with the unit, they can if you've dropped it and want them to repair it.

dEfEndEr_2

I really can't recall, but i'll say it was along those lines.

So, I have to sign a form stating that it might be our fault, and that i'd pay for it..!

(not the case as i've not opened it, but i'm an Electrical Engineer) Say it's a small peice of plastic inside, on which a spring and switch is placed. It's broken, they say' not covered, was fitted when it left the factory.
I then have to pay for the repair that I had no choice in, and that I still beleive was a fault when delivered.
Even a DRY JOINT (Sony springs to mind) isn't covered (working when it left the factory)

I've written to their head office, and also contacted Trading Standards..

it's also covered by their 'full insurance', so even if it was dropped, their insurance should cover it...

I forgot to mention, that before I got involved, The farther had called the insurance company who said to him to:>
'take it back to the store and they will replace it, as it should have lasted more than 5 months'

So section 3b above is useless, it's covered by the Insurance they sell..!

stugib

dEfEndEr wrote: »

(1)If section 48A above applies, the buyer may require the seller—
(a)to repair the goods, or
(b)to replace the goods.

Note that doesn't say the consumer has the choice, it just says they're the remedies that are available to you.

dEfEndEr wrote: »

If you have had some use from the goods or have had them for a while before you take them back you could ask for a repair or a replacement item. You, as the consumer, have the option of which solution you would like, however you must not require the trader to repair or replace the goods if this would be too costly, as compared to another remedy.

That's the first time I've ever seen it that black and white. I don't think it's ever been tested from anything I've seen, and the law doesn't seem to back it up (it's open to interpretation to be fair).

dEfEndEr wrote: »

Very inconvienint for my 7 year old to not be able to have bedtime stories playing while I'm stuck at work..!

I don't think that's a significant enough inconvenience to dictate a replacement rather than a repair. It's always an inconvenience in some way when things are faulty but retailers should have an opportunity to inspect first.

neilmcl

dEfEndEr wrote: »

Taken from Consumer Direct

When can I get a refund? When will I be entitled to only a repair or replacement?

If you are returning goods that are not of satisfactory quality or not as described and you return them within a reasonable period of time you may be entitled to ask for a full refund. If you have had some use from the goods or have had them for a while before you take them back you could ask for a repair or a replacement item. You, as the consumer, have the option of which solution you would like, however you must not require the trader to repair or replace the goods if this would be too costly, as compared to another remedy.
If a repair or replacement is not possible for the trader to provide, then you may be entitled to a reduction in the price of the goods to reflect the use up to that point or a refund. These remedies exist alongside the remedies available to you under the general law to terminate the contract for breach of condition and obtain a full refund.
Any remedy that is carried out by the trader must be carried to be within a reasonable time for the consumer and without causing significant inconvenience.


So your saying I missread that, or the advise they give is WRONG ???
It's a £189.99 unit,
My Costs to send off an item of this size/weight would be around £25 each direction.
The cheapest repair service to look at an item like that is around £50
Thats already over 50% of the cost of the item
.

Not unreasonable, for me to ask for a replacement, as stated above, MY RIGHT to ask, not to be TOLD they repair..!

Very inconvienint for my 7 year old to not be able to have bedtime stories playing while I'm stuck at work..!

You seem to have missed the essential part which I've highlighted in red for you.

neilmcl

dEfEndEr wrote: »

Thats not what the act states. 6 months is the time frame where the consumer does not have to prove the items was MADE faulty, but up to the trader to PROVE IT WASN'T..!

After 6 months it's up to the consumer to prove it was.

It's a huge document, and I've read alot of it..!

Clearly not understood it though.

Chimpofdoom

defender, i'm currently dealing with currys myself on a similar issue, so I know how defensive they can get when it comes to returns/repairs. Although they are technically correct in that they can insist on a repair, they obviously haven't informed you of the T&C's of their repair process.

Basically they say, they can take you TV away for repair and aim to get it back to you within 28 days, if they do not get it back to you, on the 29th day you would be entitled to a replacement (they usually issue vouchers). But wait there's more!

If you get your TV back and the problem still hasn't been fixed within the 28 days and you report the issue/any new issues (more on this in a sec) within 3 days, it's classed as a continuation! So hypothetically say it was away for 10 days and you get it back, they would have 18 days left to repair it and get it back to you!

My experience was that the TV went away, came back 13 days later, engineers report stated nothing wrong, but the problem was still there and added cosmetic damage to the back (like spray paint). TV is away again, they now have the existing problem and the back to repair and they currently have 6 days left (it took 13 days for them to change settings). Shop assistant is convinced they won't get it fixed and i'll get a new TV.

Also that form that you signed stating it was your fault, I made sure the customer service rep edited it before I left, so he should of done the same to the shop copy?

Also DSGi's policy is that they do not see a TV being taken away for repair as an inconvenience. If it was a cooker/washing machine, it would be different.

Chimp.

stugib

neilmcl wrote: »

You seem to have missed the essential part which I've highlighted in red for you.

Agreed, I'd forgotten about that bit. That is the retailers 'get out' even if the law was interpreted as the consumers choice - they can very easily claim a repair is cheaper for them than a replacement.

dEfEndEr_2

Neil,

I've taken that to mean that I have the choice of what gets done, as long as it's repair/replace (i wanted replace) as compaired to ANOTHER remedy.
i.e. another is for me to get it repaired and for THEM to foot the bill (as in the case of the 28 day rule) i.e. if after 28 days I am not happy, I can buy from another store and get them to pay for it. (cheaper for me in time and effort, I charge £150 an hour for my work, so they have cost me more than the item is worth, besides the point I know as I can't claim for my loss of earnings etc)

My point is that for ME to get it fixed would be less ecanomic (sorry I can't spell) than to have it replaced, yet your saying that they have stated it's cheaper for them to send it off, get it looked at, then maybe replace it anyway or fix it) and that I must be happy to have something that could have been built faulty, and bodged to get it working for a few months)

And I've simply got to except that faulty goods can be sold by large retails and they get away with it?