Comet Must Be Stopped

psych30

On 16.11.2011 my Hotpoint washer dryer WDL540G broke down for the second time since I purchased it from Comet, Bridgend on 24.05.2009 for £419.99, taking out an extended warranty for an additional £239.99 following Comet’s usual hard sell of “you can’t be without one of these” policies. My first problem was with the new phone number that you replaced the one on my receipt with that charges 10p per min - ridiculous in itself considering I paid £239.99 for an aftercare service! In any case, after being told I could either ring back or wait for a call back within 24hrs due to "high call volumes" I decided to wait for a call back and not spend any more than I already had at this point.

When I did receive a call back 4hrs later I explained the various problems with my machine that had now completely stopped working, in addition to my kitchen having flooded when I had to open the door to try and get my locked-in washing back out. The assistant placed me on hold and when returned stated the engineer has advised he could order parts beforehand and asked for a serial number that she insisted would be on the inside of the machine on the rim, however I explained that the sticker must have come off or been removed with the previous door (as the machine has already been once repaired by Comet due to a fault, during which I was without the machine for over a week) and was definitely no longer there. I was again placed on hold and the assistant reiterated that the sticker "must be there" to which I again assured her that it wasn't and in any case, since the details of my machine were on the system surely that would be sufficient since you know the machine is a Hotpoint washer dryer model WDL540G (details of which are on the insurance documents).

I was then informed that the details held were not enough to order parts beforehand and that I would "definitely need more than one call out", the first simply to establish the serial number which as I have already said is no longer there!!!! I was told that this was how it must be and then, after being placed on hold again, was informed the earliest first call out would not be until a week away on 23rd November 2011. I explained that this was not good enough as I have four children and cannot be without a machine for this length of time, let alone a further period of however long ordering parts would be, however the assistant clearly was not concerned and said she would add me to a cancellation list but nothing else could be done.

I was really angry about this situation for a number of reasons; firstly the insistence that the engineer could not prepare for a call out without the serial number despite knowing the make and model of the machine (as confirmed in a text message after the call confirming the repair date), and secondly the disregard for the extensive inconvenience being without a machine would cause my large family, especially as I paid £239.99 in the good faith that Comet would provide prompt and efficient after care. I can Google search my machine with the information that you already have on record and return multiple machine parts, including from Hotpoint themselves, but Comet engineers with extensive experience cannot prepare for a call out

On 23.11.11 the 1st engineer visit occurred. The engineer ("Keith") arrived at 12.30hrs and had finished by 13.00hrs. He did not replace any parts and simply cleaned out the pump which he claimed was the cause of all the machine problems. I queried this and I informed him that I felt the issues with the tumble dryer settings were different to the wash settings - however he denied there were any other faults with the machine aside from simply cleaning out the pump. I also asked about replacing the front panel to the machine which has broken off, but he refused to fix this claiming it to be "cosmetic" and not covered by the £239.99 policy I have taken out. I had no option but to take Keith's word that the machine was repaired and after he left I ran a wash cycle which seemed okay; however as suspected when I ran the tumble dryer setting the machine broke down and once again all the lights were flashing and the cycle would not complete. I took a video recording of this fault in case Comet attempted to wriggle out of it again!

I telephoned Comet again on the 10p per min. service number, initially spoke with "Rose" and explained how frustrated I was that my fault had not been repaired, especially as I had already made a formal complaint regards the length of time I had to wait for the service and the excessive inconvenience being without my machine had already caused. I was transferred then to a "Steven" and once again had to repeat my complaint - he then placed me on hold and returned to inform me that the system was showing an "error" on my account and that he could not re-book an engineer. He assured me that I would be contacted “ASAP” by a senior member of staff to deal with the problem and I reiterated how angry I was at the level of service and that I am not prepared to be without my machine any longer. He again assured me I would receive a callback. Not surprisingly no one bothered to phone me back until a day later when another engineer visit was booked for 28.11.11.

A different engineer came on 28.11.11 and, much like the first, did not spend a great deal of time examining the machine and I would say that he had pretty much guessed at the fault by my description of the problems since he did not wait long enough to see the cycle fail for himself. In any case, his 'guess' with the heater box would imply that I was likely to experience further continued problems with my machine as he said the error "most likely" lies with the box becoming clogged with fluff over time which he said is "very common". There is no way to rectify this problem other that via an engineer - since there is a flaw with the design of the machine meaning that the filter cannot be unclogged by myself (as can with other machines) and requires an engineer to take apart the machine to clean it. This is a design flaw that it well known and has been highlighted in at least 3 review sites that I have found and attached below for you to see - one of the review sites is on Comet themselves gaining just 2.5 stars, so clearly they are aware there is a design flaw yet are still selling the machine. I would like to know why the first engineer did not discover this fault even though I made it very clear that I felt the tumble dryer had a separate problem.

By now I was still without a working machine and this was now going into the 3rd week before the 'assumed' latest fault could be dealt with. That's 3 weeks without the machine I paid £239.99 to ensure I would never be without due to the necessity of the machine for my family. In the meantime I had written to Bob Darke, Managing Director, with my complaints in November 2011; he did not respond but a “Sarah Stark” at the directors office had been in contact to advise me that she would be “monitoring the situation”. She pointed out to me that if I was unhappy I should "take it to Trading Standards" which I followed up and a complaint was made and consequently handled by a Jemma Robinson, Fair Trading Officer at Bridgend.

By the 7th Dec 2011 the issue was still unresolved. The machine would wash and the drying cycle will run but the clothes would not dry - even after waiting 2 hours the clothes still come out wet. I contacted Sarah Stark at Comet and informed her that the machine was still not fit for purpose and her response was to... SEND ANOTHER ENGINEER!! I asked her what should I expect to be reasonable as I had already had 3 engineer visits over the course of a month and she said that there is no limit.

After a further visit on 09.12.11 the engineer could not find any reason for why my machine was still not drying as he said all the parts were working as they should and so he was "stumped". The only conclusion he could come to was to inform me that my machine was "inefficient" and that I "should not expect the same efficiency as newer models". He also went on to state that "these condenser dryers are known for their inefficiency" and that his only suggestion was to "run some extra spin cycles" to try and get the clothes dryer that way!

It seemed I had paid over £659.98 for a washer dryer plus insurance to have a machine that I cannot expect to dry. But it seemed this is what I was now stuck with since Comet were not interested in helping me further, neither were Trading Standards unless I could pay for an independent survey which I could not afford to do.

I therefore put up with not having a dryer however, once again on 02.02.2012 the original fault resurfaced - I had no working machine at all and another flood in my kitchen I telephoned Sarah Stark at Comet to once again be told I need to wait for another engineer visit and the earliest would not be until 08.02.2012. Once again Sarah Stark, despite patronisingly repeating that she “understood the situation”, informed me that the call-out could not be any sooner and that I would just have to wait whilst she “continues to monitor the situation”. The engineer came on 08.02.2012 and failed to fix the machine. He replaced the pump but informed me that this had not fixed the problem as the alternator had also blown and that he would have to order this part – he informed me this would likely take another week! So here I am again a mother of 4 with no washer or dryer even though Comet happily took £239.99 of my money to ensure this would not happen. I again telephoned Sarah Stark to urge that she must surely authorise a replacement machine as I had paid for new for old cover and had already pointed out as set out in Section 48B of the Sale of Goods Act (1979) "the remedy that the Trader offers you must not cause you ‘significant inconvenience’. However Sarah Stark stated that the machine would not be replaced unless it became un-economical to do so.

I pointed out to Sarah Stark that it could not possibly be economical to have paid for a total of 6 engineer call outs since the machine was purchased, 5 of which having been since November 2011, in addition to the numerous parts that had already been replaced. Sarah Stark responded that each time was a “new issue” and that they did not account for the overall costs – obviously this is how Comet avoid honouring their new for old agreements! Sarah Stark was asked to provide me with a copy of the summaries of each engineer visit and a costing for the call-out and parts in order to evidence the economical costs verses the unacceptable stress and anxieties that Comet have caused thus far, only to be informed that this information would cost me £10! Obviously Comet do not feel they have robbed my family enough yet and now want to charge £10 for data that legally I have been informed should have been provided at each call-out. I have never been presented with a print out at the visits to evidence what work has been carried out at my property.


Having written a formal letter of complaint to Bob Darke MD the case has now been passed to "Angelina" who has been as useless as Sarah Stark. She telephoned me today (15/02/12) to inform me that the parts needed will not be in this week and I just have to wait!!!!!!!!!

Please please help me to bring Comet to justice

visidigi

Ok, you need to re-write the above.

Its too long, too emotional - stick to facts, remove emotion and write it again, bullet point if needed.

unholyangel

Well ultimately, if you're claiming under your warranty, both parties need to stick to the terms and conditions contained in your warranty information.

If you're claiming under SoGA, then yes they can require that you get a independent engineers report - but if this is found in your favour....it would be refundable.

I have personally dealt with Sarah recently and she was great with me, nice and polite/cheerful too. However this may be because I was polite and nice with her. I'm not saying you don't have a right to be annoyed, but often people let those feelings show more than they should when trying to get the issue resolved and in the end, it only works against them.

As above, when writing letters of complaint.....stick to the key facts and try and keep your letter as straightforward and simple as possible. Listing the problems are a very good idea as it enables the people who receive your complaint to look at your letter and quickly see what the problem is without having to spend 10 minutes reading only to forget half the issues by the time they finish because the key points are buried in amongst ramblings.

You said you've spoke to trading standards, what exactly did they say? Did you speak to consumer direct? Have you looked through your policy documents to see what the terms and conditions are surrounding the "new for old"?

psych30

I have been nothing but polite and cheerful when I spoke with Sarah in November, but as it is now February my patience is wearing thin as I am sure anyone can appreciate. I keep being told I have to wait for an engineer and was very polite when waiting for the first 6 call outs - but as said it is now February and still I have no machine.

Trading Standards stated they can do no more unless I pay for an independent review since Comet are offering repair - and since they do not state what is "reasonable" in their terms they can get away with nearly 4 months as reasonable despite my having to drive the washing of my family of 2 adults and 4 children to my mother's house DAILY in order to get clean work clothes and school uniforms.

Re. new for old, Comet cleverly cover themselves by giving each call-out a new job number which then constitutes a new problem. Even though the machine has not been fixed properly since November 2011 and the cost of all the parts so far replaced comes to over £300, not including call-out charges, Comet state that THIS JOB is still economical to replace. My sister had the same problem with her computer from Comet which went back to their repair center 7 times and still Comet would not provide a new replacement since all 7 jobs were counted as separate!

neilmcl

Its not up to Comet to decide whats "reasonable", it's what a court will decide and imo they would probably find in your favour. The only thing you can now do is send Comet a formal letter before action detailing that you are rejecting any further repair remedy and you wish to have a replacement or refund.

unholyangel

Would the reports from comet show that it is the same problem reoccuring? Or does new for old only cover for "faults they cannot fix"?

It may be worthwhile contacting consumer direct and looking to pursue under SoGA which would require an independent report yes but as i said, you would have this cost refunded if the report was found in your favour. You could take a chance and pay comet the £10 in the hopes that one of their reports will state it is an inherent fault which cannot be "fixed" long term. Also under SoGA, any remedy must be at no cost to the consumer and of no significant inconvenience. This puts you on better footing as you could claim reasonable out of pocket expenses for not being able to wash clothes at home.

However, if pushing under the SoGA, you are probably more likely to get a partial refund than a replacement (you can request one or the other but the company can refuse if it is disproportionately costly - your only grounds for rejecting a repair or replacement is if they cannot do it without causing significant inconvenience - significant being the key word).

You could of course try a letter before action stating that their own engineers have confirmed the fault is inherent and that it will keep happening as the machine is not fit for purpose (from what you said above, at least one of the engineers has said this to you?). But generally a letter before action is a last resort before filing a small claims against them.

unholyangel

neilmcl wrote: »

Its not up to Comet to decide whats "reasonable", it's what a court will decide and imo they would probably find in your favour. The only thing you can now do is send Comet a formal letter before action detailing that you are rejecting any further repair remedy and you wish to have a replacement or refund.

I think (i may be wrong) the OP was referring to their own warranty rather than SoGA.

However, SoGA is your legal minimum....the problem is, until the fault is "proven" to be inherent.....Comet arent required to offer a remedy under SoGA and can stick to their own warranty T&C's.

Small claims does however go on balance of probabilities. It is not something you need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Unless OP has reports from comet engineers to comet showing inherent fault that means comet were aware there was a inherent fault and failed to comply with the SoGA which could land them in hot water as i seem to recall something somewhere about it being illegal for a company to purposely deceive consumers about their rights/entitlements.

neilmcl

unholyangel wrote: »

However, if pushing under the SoGA, you are probably more likely to get a partial refund than a replacement (you can request one or the other but the company can refuse if it is disproportionately costly - your only grounds for rejecting a repair or replacement is if they cannot do it without causing significant inconvenience - significant being the key word).

Or within a reasonable time, which is the other important key phrase.

unholyangel

neilmcl wrote: »

Or within a reasonable time, which is the other important key phrase.

Well i think in this case, i think they're both linked. For example, where a 30 day waiting period for a replacement on another item may very well be reasonable, I wouldnt see it as reasonable for a washing machine due to the nature of the goods and the significant inconvenience caused by not having a working washing machine for 30 days. Which is why I didnt mention it, but you are right It does state they can rescind the contract if the buyer requires the seller to replace or repair the goods but the seller is unable to do so within a reasonable time or without causing significant inconvenience (at least from memory, the actual wording of it may be a little different).


I suppose that is to cover for items that perhaps are not a inconvenience to be without but to stop companies from taking months to repair/replace them.

neilmcl

unholyangel wrote: »

I think (i may be wrong) the OP was referring to their own warranty rather than SoGA.

I hadn't bothered to read the full tome that was the OP.

Archangel1066

visidigi wrote: »

Ok, you need to re-write the above.

Its too long, too emotional - stick to facts, remove emotion and write it again, bullet point if needed.

Wow. That was 'helpful'.

psych30 : Comet's warranty policies have long been in the media for not being worth the paper they are written on. I haven't yet heard of a single case where they have provided new for old cover as promised. They don't care how much a customer is inconvenienced or upset by their actions; that much is apparent. I've had similar dealings with Comet myself and the best course of action that produced results for me is to make it official, as neilmcl said. Trading Standards have templates on their website that help you write a letter, basically saying that you are rejecting the goods because they are not of satisfactory quality. They have fourteen days to respond to that, and then if you don't hear anything, follow it up with the final letter which is the last step before legal action. You also need to forward copies of the letter to the warranty holders and also possibly the credit card company you used to buy the machine, as I'm pretty sure I remember someone from Consumer Direct telling me that they may be liable too. I tried this and I had someone from Comet's head office ringing me within a few days, apologizing and promising to do their best to put things right.

All that being said, it doesn't matter if they do put this right eventually - the bottom line is Comet are a bunch of wasters, and I would never shop with them again for the amount of upset they are quite happy to put their customers through. Personally, I think you're better off putting whatever you would have spent on a warranty into a savings account so you have money there if anything should go wrong beyond the manufacturers warranty. It's not ideal by any means, but warranties are meant to prevent all this stress and inconvenience. In that, at least, they are fundamentally flawed.

Best of luck with this - let us know what Comet say