Claim under section 75 of the credit consumer act 1974

YorkshireBoy

thenudeone wrote: »

...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.

That would be my approach, based on this...

Section 75 only helps the consumer where there has been...a breach of contract...by the supplier of the goods and services. These are legal terms. But for the purpose of section 75 and put very simply:

• A breach of contract is where the supplier fails to do what the contract says it must, either expressly or by implication.
  For example, there is a breach of contract where goods that have been paid for are not supplied at all, or are not up to standard.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/goods-and-services-bought-with-credit.html

Lenders seem to stall on/block section 75 claims, as reported in the many case study examples on the FOS website, so formalise your complaint and let it be known you intend to refer the matter to the FOS if necessary for adjudication. You may find, especially if faced with a £500 case fee, they then capitulate.

ILW

thenudeone wrote: »

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.

If this was a cheap £100 tv, then it may be argued that 18 months is OK. We do not know whether this was a "quality" item or not.