TV RIP ater 14 months

moonrakerz

Mankysteve wrote: »

See my comments in red

Regrettably, like so many, you are reading - but you obviously don't understand what you are reading !

"For the first 6 months it down to the retailer to prove that the fault is inherent with the item"
Utter rubbish - it actually the other way round ! Why on earth would the retailer want to prove that HE had sold a duff item ????

Neither is getting an "engineers report" the answer - this so called report needs to PROVE that the item was defective in design or manufacture. Do you think that LG or Currys or Dixons are going to accept that Fred from the local TV repair shop knows more about TV design and manufacture than they do ?
In some cases a retailer might decide that showing goodwill is the best option, but many are fully aware of what the Law says and are not intimidated by people "spouting off" about SoGA.

So many people are given totally false expectations by the way that The Sale Of Goods Act is "quoted" as being the answer to all the consumer's problems.

Mankysteve

To qoute
"Proving the fault
Generally, the buyer needs to demonstrate
the goods were faulty at the time of sale.
This is so if he chooses to request an
immediate refund or compensation
(damages).
There is one exception. This is when the
buyer is a consumer and returns the goods
in the first six months from the date of the
sale, and requests a repair or replacement
or, thereafter, a partial or full refund. In that
case, the consumer does not have to prove
the goods were faulty at the time of the
sale. It is assumed that they were. If the
retailer does not agree, it is for him to prove
that the goods were satisfactory at the time
of sale."

To quote from http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file25486.pdf

Its got nothing to do with the manufacture whether the item is found fault or not the contract is between the retailer and the consumer. If we have to reply on a manufactures report then no one would ever get a refund because all they would have to say that the fault was either our fault or fair ware and tear and we have no where to go. But a court wouldn't see it that way.

moonrakerz

Mankysteve wrote: »

Its got nothing to do with the manufacture whether the item is found fault or not the contract is between the retailer and the consumer. If we have to reply on a manufactures report then no one would ever get a refund because all they would have to say that the fault was either our fault or fair ware and tear and we have no where to go. But a court wouldn't see it that way.

Thank you for quoting from the document I referenced, hope you found it to be of interest

1. It has everything to do with the manufacturer - if everyman and his dog is going back to Currys/Dixons with their TV which have all failed after 13 months, what are Currys/Dixons going to do ? replace them all with new ones out of their own pocket ? Not likely, they will be after the manufacturer for recompense.

2. I didn't say rely on a "manufactures report", I said one from an engineer. By that I mean an Engineer - not a washing machine repair man or a Sky installer. Someone who can put up a good case that IC XYZ1234 in the IF tuner in your TV was not designed to be used in that type of environment.

3. " fair ware and tear" - a much abused phrase ! How many posts do you see on this site asking for the "cheapest ............." ?
A pair of shoes (for example) at £9.99, worn every day, will not last as long as a pair of £50 shoes. You seem to be implying that they should. 6 months "fair wear and tear" will destroy the cheap pair, the expensive pair will probably be hardly marked.

THAT is the way the Court would see it !

Zandoni

To let you know what happened in the end.

I accepted the offer of £375 + £100 for the engineers report, I then went into Currys and negotiated a £49 discount on a 50" Plasma.

Which meant that I had to pay £225 to get a better TV, I'm happy with that.