PCWorld incompetency can save you money !

OlliesDad

sirmarcus wrote: »

Er no.....the chances of the above happening in my case were practically zero and would have meant both PCWorld and Apollo
acting without any common sense or customer focus.

So you agree that it was out of goodwill rather than the Sales of Goods Act.

I think it is good that you got a positive result, but what i have stated is the Sales of Goods Act. It is very common for companies to ask for this report (in particular Argos ask for this quite often) and they are within their rights to ask for this.

It is important to advise on the consumer rights forum what the legal standing is in the situations you have had as shouting and screaming won't always work, but there are additional things you can do past this point.

Once again though, well done on getting a result.

sirmarcus

OlliesDad wrote: »

So you agree that it was out of goodwill rather than the Sales of Goods Act.

I think it is good that you got a positive result, but what i have stated is the Sales of Goods Act. It is very common for companies to ask for this report (in particular Argos ask for this quite often) and they are within their rights to ask for this.

It is important to advise on the consumer rights forum what the legal standing is in the situations you have had as shouting and screaming won't always work, but there are additional things you can do past this point.

Once again though, well done on getting a result.

Disagree but thanks for the praise.

The offers from PCWorld and Apollo have never been given as a gesture of good will.

As I have stated before, I have used the SOGA to negotiate and escalate, where appropriate, to get these results and I am absolutely delighted.

I appreciate your views and advise of others. However, I will continue to do as I have done with Apollo and PCWorld if similar things happen in the future. It has worked for me and I am confident that I can make it work again.:j:j:j:):)

somethingcorporate

sirmarcus wrote: »

Disagree but thanks for the praise.

The offers from PCWorld and Apollo have never been given as a gesture of good will.

As I have stated before, I have used the SOGA to negotiate and escalate, where appropriate, to get these results and I am absolutely delighted.

I appreciate your views and advise of others. However, I will continue to do as I have done with Apollo and PCWorld if similar things happen in the future. It has worked for me and I am confident that I can make it work again.:j:j:j:):)

Absolutely, but only goes to highlight how little you understand the SOGA if you cannot see why what you have got (and no doubt will continue to get) is above and beyond what is required of the retailer.

Broadstone

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Absolutely, but only goes to highlight how little you understand the SOGA if you cannot see why what you have got (and no doubt will continue to get) is above and beyond what is required of the retailer.

Only s court of law can ultimately decide what an individual can get via the SOGA; so your opinions are irrelevant and not worthy of consideration.

If anyone can get anything beyond the SOGA limits, good luck to them and I hope it continues.:rotfl:

somethingcorporate

Broadstone wrote: »

Only s court of law can ultimately decide what an individual can get via the SOGA; so your opinions are irrelevant and not worthy of consideration.

If anyone can get anything beyond the SOGA limits, good luck to them and I hope it continues.:rotfl:

Damned, there goes the neighbourhood!

You're absolutely right, but being married to a solicitor (and having studied it myself as part of my accountancy training) probably gives me a bit more insight into it than a teenage keyboard-warrior that should probably get out a bit more given it's school holidays :P

If we took your opinion the whole board would be shut down because ultimately only a court can decide on which side of the law various issues are on... but then courts can be wrong! We're very valid in giving our opinions and if you don't like that then perhaps you should leave an open forum!

unholyangel

adam.mt wrote: »

Unholyangel, ignore Broadstone he doesn't seem to be worth the bother of a reply. You are correct, have been helpful (repeatedly) and are trying to give the legal standpoint so that other readers aren't mislead.

It's correct that sirmarcus has got "a result from PCWorld via SoGA and deserves credit for doing this" however as Unholyangel has rightly pointed out it's only been because whoever he dealt with didn't understand SoGA themselves and thus gave more than they had to; if they had dealt with it as per SoGA then sirmarcus would actually be out of pocket!

Don't let posts from idiots discourage you!

Thanks for that. And i did ignore him, he continued to be abusive in subsequent posts which seem to have been deleted :rotfl:

We all seem to agree the OP got a good result. Just disagree on whether it was down to retailer going above and beyond what is their legal obligations or the customers knowledge of SOGA.

Just hope the newbs dont get confused!

sirmarcus

Hi all,

I have noticed that some of the postings on this thread are getting a bit; if you pardon the expression; a bit personel and 'near the mark'.

Could I please ask people to refrain from doing this as my OP was never intended to seek such views or opinions. I just wanted to share my experiences and hopefully help others.

I always welcome poeple's views and opinions; although sometimes I will politely (I hope) disagree and do my own thing.

I again hope that I have helped people as it was my original intention.

Broadstone

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Damned, there goes the neighbourhood!

You're absolutely right, but being married to a solicitor (and having studied it myself as part of my accountancy training) probably gives me a bit more insight into it than a teenage keyboard-warrior that should probably get out a bit more given it's school holidays :P

If we took your opinion the whole board would be shut down because ultimately only a court can decide on which side of the law various issues are on... but then courts can be wrong! We're very valid in giving our opinions and if you don't like that then perhaps you should leave an open forum!

You may have studied but I bet you didn't qualify ! If you did, it is a sad reflection on the quality of accountants nowadays !

With regards your comment 'you don't like that then perhaps you should leave an open forum', the saying 'the pot calling the kettle black' springs to mind.

sirmarcus

sirmarcus wrote: »

Hi all,

I have noticed that some of the postings on this thread are getting a bit; if you pardon the expression; a bit personel and 'near the mark'.

Could I please ask people to refrain from doing this as my OP was never intended to seek such views or opinions. I just wanted to share my experiences and hopefully help others.

I always welcome poeple's views and opinions; although sometimes I will politely (I hope) disagree and do my own thing.

I again hope that I have helped people as it was my original intention.

In addition to my previous posting and, as the OP, I have now decided to no longer read or contribute to this thread. I made my original intentions for my OP in my previous posting and I hope now that this thread will now naturally die, which it should have down so a long time ago.

adam.mt

Back to the monitor, OP could you just qualify that indeed the cable was faulty and it wasn't just the fuse in the plug that had blown or physical damage (twisting, small cut) in the cable? Since only the cable is at fault then surely misuse is just as likely, if not more, than mis-manufacture for such an item? May not have been such in your case, but an outsider is not to know.

I also disagree that PC World would never ask for an independent report; their in-store technical staff don't repair monitors, thus they wouldn't open one up to assess a fault or potential damage which is what is required to show an inherent fault. You can't just say that it failed within 6 years, that's less than a reasonable person would expect it to last and since there's no obvious physical damage that means the fault is 'inherent'; thus, a consumer has a free 6 year warranty for all cases on any goods - it's a bit more complicated than that!