Claim under section 75 of the credit consumer act 1974

tottonboy

Hi,

I purchased a TV from and internet company Digitaldirect in May 2009 with a free three year warranty. A week ago the TV developed a fault so I contacted Digitaldirect about a warranty repair. I received an email back from them stating that the parent company at the time of my purchase had gone into administration and that the company was no longer liable for the warranty. Seems like a typical example of a Ltd company going into receivership and then appearing as another Ltd company with the same directors. Anyway I therefore decided to speak to HSBC premier as I purchased the TV using my credit card. As I understood it, the credit card company are equally liable for my purchase and as Digitaldirect have gone bust this make HSBC liable. However my conversation with HSBC did not go as I expected. They told me that they were NOT liable. I tried to insist that they are but they would not budge. Eventually they agreed to send me a 'dispute resolution form' which I should complete and they will 'take a look at it'.

Am I missing something here? Does section 75 of the credit consumer act 1974 not apply here?

Help!

ILW

You may be able to get the warranty premium back (if it was over £100.00) but it is unlikely that they will reund you on 19 month old tV.

tottonboy

Thanks for the quick response ILW!

I thought they were 'equally liable' under the consumer credit act? If this is the case are they not liable for the repair at least?

lisyloo

Did they give you a reason as to why they aren't liable?

I would have thought they were liable but I wonder if it's to do with the warranty being FREE and therefore not purchased via your credit card.

It would be helpful to understand their reason.

ILW

tottonboy wrote: »

Thanks for the quick response ILW!

I thought they were 'equally liable' under the consumer credit act? If this is the case are they not liable for the repair at least?

If it was a cheap TV they may argue that 18 months or so is not unreasonable.

tottonboy

Hi lisyloo

No they didn't give a specific reason. I understand that they're not going to just give out money without proof but I was disapointed with their response as I specifically quoted section 75 of the credit consumer act 1974 as advised on the moneysavingexpert site. Is this advise correct? Are they fully liable as Digitaldirect have gone bust?

tottonboy

ILW,

There's no way that 18 months could be considered a reasonable period of time before a TV breaks! (ref - sale of goods act).

The question is are HSBC now fully liable for the repair, replacement or refund?

ILW

What was the standard manufacturers warranty?

They will probably use that as a cut off point.

lisyloo

ILW - Why do you think they are not liable for the retailers warranty?

Is this because it was free and not paid for on the card or is there some other reason?

ILW

lisyloo wrote: »

ILW - Why do you think they are not liable for the retailers warranty?

Is this because it was free and not paid for on the card or is there some other reason?

They probably are liable for the retailers warranty, but only for the cost of it. If it was free then the cost is zero.

thenudeone

If the item was not "of merchantable quality" (bearing in mind its price) then they are jointly liable for that breach of the the Sale of Goods Act. Would you expect a TV to last 18 months? Probably. (There is a separate thread on this subject)
The cost (if any) of the warranty may be a red herring, although you could try to argue that you have paid for a "working television for 3 years" so if it breaks down the supplier is in breach of contract. If you had paid over £100 for the warranty then you could have a different or separate claim for failure to provide the services required under the warranty. That would be much more clear cut claim as the remedies are very clear (i.e. the cost of the repairs).
My response (many years ago) when trying to use s75 against Halifax was that they would only pay out once you have won a court case; regardless of the strength of the claim. In my case I used the legal service provided by my home insurer, who pestered the supplier to give me a refund, without having to go to court against Halifax.