faulty washing machine purchased from comet

guyster1973uk

hello everyone. i purchased an indesit wixxe127 washing machine from my local comet store on the 2nd of may 2010 i paid £199 for the product however 2 months (july) after i purchased the item the door latch developed a fault(door would not click over and lock when i tryed to close the door)and faulty drum paddles( they had come loose) i phoned comet customer services explained the faults to them. they said no problem sir we will send someone out to repair the faults. the engineer came out replaced the drum paddles and repaired the door latch. while he was doing the repair i was talking to him and he said that the door latch becoming faulty is a common problem on that particular model.i didnt think anything of it. so the washing machine was working fine again and on the 11th of september 2010 the door latch again developed a fault(door would not click over and lock when i tryed to close the door). i phoned comet customer services again and explained to them that this is the 2nd time in 4months that the door latch has broken. i also said that i was not happy with the machine and that i did not want it repaired again or exchanged. i explained i wanted the machine picked up and give me a full refund. i was told oh sorry sir we cant give refunds after 28 days from date of purchase. i contacted consumer direct and explained to them the situation. they said u are quite within your rights to refuse a repair. i phoned comet and told them i was dealing with consumer direct and was told by consumer direct i was well within my rights to refuse a repair. comet said to me thats fine sir but we still need to send someone to do an inspection. i said thats fine. the engineer came out on 16th september 2010 done the inspection and filled out a report and he confirmed what the first engineer had said about the faulty door latch on that model of machine was a common problem . i phoned comet on 17th september 2010 to find what was going to happen and they basically informed me that the service centre were not prepared to exchange or refund because they felt that the item could be repaired.i informed them that i didnt want a repair done i wanted the item removed and a full refund on the grounds that the door latch had broken once had been repaired once has broken again for a 2nd time and if i allowed it to be repaired it could break again and again.

does anyone know where i stand with trading standards or can i make a claim ?

thanks
guyster

p.s. sorry about the long drawn out explanation lol

Hintza

In some ways I think you are being unreasonable in that you shoud afford them the opportunity to repair the machine. That is only reasonable.

However, if this is a common fault as you suggest it might be worth contacting the manufacturer to see if they have come up with a more permanent slution (eg redesign/manufacture of the part that is causing the problem). The danger of course out then start to run into problems when it falls out of warranty in May and they then start to get difficult about it.

shortchanged_2

Personally I would say if it's a common fault then you have a legitimate claim under the Sales of Goods Act in that it is NOT of satisfactory quality. As it has broken down within the first 6 months (twice) of use you have a very strong case that this is an inherent fault and also it fails the durablity test miserably.

At the end of the day these companies should not get away with selling such rubbish.

I think you are perfectly entitled to claim for a refund as it is inherently faulty and therefore the shop are in breach of contract with you.

If they are not willing to play ball and you are not happy with their response send them a letter before action stating that because the machine is blatantly faulty you want to have your money back. Be prepared to take them court if you have to. You have a strong case as it is within the first 6 months of purchasing.

guyster1973uk

well like i said the engineer came out on 16th september 2010 done the inspection and filled out a report and he confirmed what the first engineer had said about the faulty door latch on that model of machine was a common problem. i actually seen him writing up the report on his laptop and he had put on the report " customer was advised that this is a common problem"

i have spoken to consumer direct and they said the same as yourselves to write a letter to comet head office stating all the facts and to quote sale of goods act 1979 and state i want a response within a certain time period. they said to me if u do not get a response back with that time period call us back and we will take matters further.

BaldacchinoR

I agree with shortchanged, you should get a refund, even though Martin's advice - see links above - is that this is only likely within 28 days. Citizen's Advice Bureau has advised me in the past that the '28 days rule' is incorrect and used by retailers to mislead consumers. A refund can be obtained under the Sale of Goods legislation for an undefined period which can be at least 6 months if not a year.

Consumer Direct sometimes refer a complaint to your local Trading Standards Dept for you and they in turn may contact the retailer, either by phone, e-mail or letter, which will often do the trick. Maybe that's what they mean when they say they will take the matter further for you after you've written to Comet. I'd give Comet no more than 14 days to reply to you.

Esqui

A full refund is only an absolute right within a "reasonable period" in which you have to inspect the goods are working*. For a washing machine, this would certainly be no more than a couple of weeks. After such time your right is to a 'remedy', which can be the usual repair/replacement/refund (full or partial). You can request a full refund, but they can reject your request if it is disproportionately costly.

As a rule, I'd normally say 3 failed repairs before exchanging/refunding...assuming said repairs can be done in a decent timeframe.

And BaldacchinoR:

A refund can be obtained under the Sale of Goods legislation for an undefined period which can be at least 6 months if not a year.

True, but 'can be' is the operative part. It's not an absolute right to a refund. And the period is not undefined, but 6 years from purchase (though if you managed to get a full refund on a 6 year old item, I'd take my hat off to you!)


*Or at least appear to be working

RobertoMoir

Esqui wrote: »

A full refund is only an absolute right within a "reasonable period" in which you have to inspect the goods are working*. For a washing machine, this would certainly be no more than a couple of weeks. After such time your right is to a 'remedy', which can be the usual repair/replacement/refund (full or partial). You can request a full refund, but they can reject your request if it is disproportionately costly.

By and large, I would agree with this. However, if the goods have an inherent fault which is known as such to the repair engineers then I think it could be argued this changes the picture somewhat.

As a rule, I'd normally say 3 failed repairs before exchanging/refunding...assuming said repairs can be done in a decent timeframe.

Again, I agree with this as it goes, but there are exceptions to this rule and I'd suggest this might be one.

As a point of interest, if an item has an inherent fault and replacing the failed component doesn't actually cure the fault, then does this actually count as a "repair" at all? If the same fault keeps recurring then I think its reasonable to say the fault hasn't been repaired, because it is not possible to repair the fault due to a design defect.

shortchanged_2

If a washing machine develops the same fault twice within 4 months of receiving the machine then I think it is perfectly reasonable for the customer to request a refund for that said item. How long is this expected to go on for? Is the customer expected to have the same repair every few months for the next 5 years?
I'm sure if you took it to a court of law you would have a very strong case for a refund under the SoGA. Don't let these shops continually fob you off. If it happens regularly it is a real inconvenience.

guyster1973uk

hi again folks i sent the following letter to comet head office yesterday by recorded delivery:

---

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: Faulty goods and the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended)

On 2nd of may 2010 I bought a indesit wixxe127 washing machine from you for £199.00 which has stopped working.

The problem is that the door lock would not click over on closure of the door and the drum paddles had become loose. On reporting these faults to Comet an engineer came out to repair these faults. The engineer told me that the fault on the door lock was a common problem with this particular model. These problems occurred in July, approximately two months after purchase. On 11th of September, the door lock again developed the same fault. I again contacted Comet to report this and told them that I was not happy with the goods and asked for the item to be collected and for a refund to be issued. Comet informed me that they did not issue refunds after 28 days from date of purchase and that they would send an engineer out on 16th of September to repair the lock again, which I reluctantly agreed to. I then contacted Consumer Direct who informed me that I was within my legal rights to refuse a repair, upon which I again contacted Comet to inform them of this information. Comet then said that I had to allow an inspection of the machine. The engineer who was dispatched to repair the fault was informed by myself that I was refusing the repair and that he had to do an inspection and report. This engineer confirmed the opinion of the first one that the door lock failure was a common fault with this machine.

I contacted Comet again on 17th September to find out what was going to happen and was told that they were not prepared to exchange or refund, as it was felt that the machine could be repaired, yet again. I informed Comet that I did not want the machine repaired again, on the grounds that the door lock had broken once and been repaired once, and had broken again for a 2nd time within four months from purchase date and that the problem was likely to be ongoing


The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) states that when a consumer buys goods from a trader they must be: as described; of a satisfactory quality; and fit for any purpose made known at the time of sale to the seller.

This legislation also states that the seller, not the manufacturer, is legally obliged to sort out a problem if the goods do not meet these requirements.

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) says: if goods break within the first six months after purchase then there is a presumption the goods were faulty when sold.

My goods are not fit for purpose/of satisfactory quality and I wish to claim a refund of my goods under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as amended.

Please respond to my complaint within 7 days from receipt of this letter

---

if i dont get a response by say middle of next week im gonna hand it over to consumer direct let them deal who will probably hand it over to local trading standards office or something.

shortchanged_2

Goodluck guyster and let us know how you get on.

guyster1973uk

thanks mate. ive had no response back from comet yet and the letter was posted on 19th september and they received and signed for it 21st september at 7:09am(i tracked it online). does anyone know where i stand if it ends up going to court(will i end up having to pay court charges if i win or lose ?) or will trading standards pursue the matter for me? im going to contact consumer direct tomorrow to find out where i go from here in regard to comet not responding to my letter.