My burning fridge...

rsykes2000

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

So you'd better hope that any items you buy in a sale don't go faulty as you'll end up severely out of pocket if they do...

Sorry, that's a load of rubbish. If you buy something in a sale then get all your money back if it goes faulty, how are you then severely out of pocket ?

OlliesDad

neilmcl wrote: »

What part of "customer cannot insist on a remedy that is disproportionately costly to another" do you not understand. If it's less costly to JL to provide a full refund then that's all they are legally obliged to do!

I would imagine that it would not be dispropotionately costly to replace the unit rather than to offer a refund (remembering that the cost of a replacement would be wholesale price, not selling price).

However, proving this would take time and effort for the OP, and as they do not have a working fridge freezer, it would make more sense to accept their offer (especially considering that they can deduct the amount of refund based on any use of the unit that they have had).

joeyboy

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

So you'd better hope that any items you buy in a sale don't go faulty as you'll end up severely out of pocket if they do...

some people don't seem to get how you'd be severely out of pocket.

Let me explain people..

Some fridge is normally £600, now £300. You buy it, you've just spent £300.

It breaks a year later, you get a refund not a replacement. You are given £300 back and possibly a gesture of good will(£10-50 voucher)

You lost £300

You gained £300+ possibly small good will token

can you see the lose folks, truly it is catastrophic.

Mark_Hewitt

rsykes2000 wrote: »

Sorry, that's a load of rubbish. If you buy something in a sale then get all your money back if it goes faulty, how are you then severely out of pocket ?

Because you'd then have to purchase a replacement item at a higher price!

rsykes2000

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

Because you'd then have to purchase a replacement item at a higher price!

Or go to another shop and buy a similar item at a similar sales price to that you spent originally ? I assume you like most people have a budget for a fridge or other piece of equipment. You would buy one at the same price you spent originally, you wouldn't be *forced* to spend loads more money. There's sales on all over the place, it's not difficult to find something.
The OP is now in the same position as they were before buying the fridge. They have £400 to buy a fridge.

Mark_Hewitt

rsykes2000 wrote: »

The OP is now in the same position as they were before buying the fridge. They have £400 to buy a fridge.

I don't disagree that JL are fulfilling their *legal* obligations. However are they doing the same morally?

It depends what you consider your starting position as. Personally I consider it to be a position of having a fridge! If that breaks down I'd expect them to fix it or replace it. End of story.

I care not that the price was low when I bought it or that the price has now gone up or that the model has been replaced, it wasn't my fault that the fridge broken down after all!

If shops cannot afford to replace items sold at sale prices then they shouldn't sell them!

As for "go to another shop", why should they? And what's to say there is a sale on elsewhere?

So I guess the moral of the story is that if you've bought something at a reduced price then put the difference in an interest earning account in the bank for a year as if it breaks down the retailer won't replace it!

182_blue

Its a bit early to be smoking that stuff :j:D

Freddie_Snowbits wrote: »

ABSOLUTE CODSWALLOP.

OP requires that JL give out liquidated damages in this case. Thugs like them should be made to pay for the errors of their ways. I say lock them all up fo the weekend, let TS go in there and remove any other faulty goods. The police should round up the staff and we the proleteriat should them plunder the store for our own ends.

Power to the People!

OlliesDad

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

I don't disagree that JL are fulfilling their *legal* obligations.

In future can you make the above a bit more clear as your original posts were suggesting that JL do have a legal obligation to replace. The clouding of legal rights and morality will only lead to alot of confusion.

AndyE_

Thanks all for your input. I think that perhaps the best course of action is take what JL are offering and regain our fridge freezer after nearly 8 weeks living out of a cool box and KFC take aways. Ideally I'd like to haggle things more but I don't have the time and effort; and from reading the advice JL are offering me what could be considered a fair deal. I'll wait for them to have another sale and try my luck at getting a like for like replacement!

Thanks again for all the help I've certainly learned a few things also!