Taking Dell to Small Claims Court

dellvictim

Hi,

My Dell laptop has experienced the Nvidia graphics failure mentioned elsewhere on MSE (new user, can't link) and mentioned by Dell on their blog.

However, it's out of warranty, and both email and written customer service refuse to acknowledge that this falls under the Sale of Goods Act. It would seem my only option left is to take them to Small Claims Court.

However, I'm put off by the fact that they're registered in Ireland - the invoice is from Dell Products registered in Dublin, and I'm in the UK. If I'm going to take them to court I should at least make sure I take the right company to court - if I take Dell UK to court they can correctly point out I have no transaction with them.

Can I take an Irish company to UK small claims court? If so, assuming I win, would I ever even get my money/costs from them?

Thanks!

dellvictim

BigLee_24

Did you order with Dell UK or Dell in Dublin??

dellvictim

Well, I ordered from dell.co.uk, 2 years ago. One would hope that was Dell UK.

Obviously I didn't check the legal entity on invoice at the time, but it seems that the transaction was actually with Dell Products, Dublin.

Equaliser123

dellvictim wrote: »

Well, I ordered from dell.co.uk, 2 years ago. One would hope that was Dell UK.

Obviously I didn't check the legal entity on invoice at the time, but it seems that the transaction was actually with Dell Products, Dublin.

Then you must claim against the company that supplied the product.

Did you pay by credit card?

Esqui

Have you provided them with proof that the fault was inherent?

dellvictim

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Then you must claim against the company that supplied the product.

Did you pay by credit card?

Yeah - I'm not even sure that I can take an Irish company to UK court? And even if I do, I imagine it'd be hard to get them to pay up.

Nope, debit card unfortunately - it was from before I had a credit card! Wouldn't be having this discussion if it was on my credit card

dellvictim

Esqui wrote: »

Have you provided them with proof that the fault was inherent?

No, but it's pretty clear to me. Known affected model, screen corrupted and then failed (but not the backlight).

They've not even challenged that this is the issue (because it's easy to get engineer's reports on these issues) - they've even apologised for it, but they merely keep parrotting that it's out of warranty - hence my intention to use the Sale of Goods Act.

Freddie_Snowbits

Esqui wrote: »

Have you provided them with proof that the fault was inherent?

Of course he has, the 'I Nose Wat Rong . Con' bored says it is faulty and their geeks are the best.

Strange that Fredas dell does not have a problem, only the bingo sites she visits are.

Esqui

dellvictim wrote: »

No, but it's pretty clear to me. Known affected model, screen corrupted and then failed (but not the backlight).

They've not even challenged that this is the issue (because it's easy to get engineer's reports on these issues) - they've even apologised for it, but they merely keep parrotting that it's out of warranty - hence my intention to use the Sale of Goods Act.

Unless you can provide one of the "easily-available" engineer's reports for your laptop, the small claims court will not even bother with you. This case is about your laptop, not other people's. At the moment, Dell have no obligation to do anything (OK, it doesn't bode well for when you do...but still).

Equaliser123

Esqui wrote: »

Unless you can provide one of the "easily-available" engineer's reports for your laptop, the small claims court will not even bother with you. This case is about your laptop, not other people's. At the moment, Dell have no obligation to do anything (OK, it doesn't bode well for when you do...but still).

Not really correct. If they have accepted that there is a fault but that their "defence" relies upon it being out of warranty, then the fault itself will not be in contention.

dellvictim

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Not really correct. If they have accepted that there is a fault but that their "defence" relies upon it being out of warranty, then the fault itself will not be in contention.

Indeed.

That said, their 'defence' to date is about the warranty, but that doesn't tell me what their defence will be in court - it could well be based on the specific fault, so I'm resigned to procuring an engineers report if ultimately necessary. It'd be sensible to have this in my initial submission, rather than relying on being asked for it and submitting it later.

Of course, in the mean time, it increases my costs, and the amount I might not get back from them if the court decides in their favour on a technicality, or even if I win and fail to collect it from them - hence my concern about chances of success/collection in the first place.