Sale of Goods act vs Vodafone

eefee · 23 February 2012 at 6:51PM

Buzby wrote: »

Voda are not exempted from their legal responsibilities, however these do not embrace what the OP believes, and many external issues can prevail, the best I hear (for a charger) was one that exploded after 18 months, and the purchaser wanted a replacement FoC. It transpired he overlooked to mention his power line had a lightning hit and was trying a low-cost route to repair (as the electricity supply company is exempt). Whilst this might not have happenbed in this case, Apple would provide a replacement for a modest fee.

Apple's 'modest fee' is £130. The repair comes with a 3 month warranty which would still run out before the end of my phone contract. Vodafone would charge £150

prosaver · 23 February 2012 at 7:05PM

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

Ignore him, he's the current forum nutter.

From disputing that you could need an engineers report to saying a charger is inherently faulty, saying a charger should last more than 2 years and then some truly nonsensical and bizarre replies, we've had them all.

my samsung charger lasted for 4 years and going strong...
my laptop charger 8 years stil going strong
my wife lg charger 3 years going stong
however my lg mobile charger ..(which is a different design)--with usb lead that pugs into charger ..failed
in the soga act it says an engineer, i am a fully qualified engineer (ond mech engineering and a hnc in construction):p
this is the first charger that has failed in my 20 year experience (anyone else?)
read this and weep.... shop keepers
9th April 2006 18:04
Claiming against John Lewis - SOGA - *WON*
I've made a claim in the county court against John Lewis plc for faulty goods under the Sale of Goods Act. Yesterday I received a date for the hearing (6 June) from the court. I wish I'd discovered this excellent website sooner, but thought I'd share my experiences anyway.

I bought a £600 computer from John Lewis which broke down when the hard drive failed. It was just over two years old. I took it back and quoted the Sale of Goods Act to them. At first they seemed very responsive and offered to have a look at the computer. They then came back to me with a repair quote of £240, and refused to incur this cost. A few letters were sent back and forth, but John Lewis remained adamant. They refused to get drawn into any discussion about my rights under the Sale of Goods Act and kept stating that I had "turned down their offer of an Extended Warranty" when I bought the computer, and the normal warranty had expired.

In January I issued a claim using Moneyclaim Online and it's taken a shocking three months for the court to set a date for the hearing, which is a further two months away (when the dispute finally gets resolved it will have been seven months since I took the computer back).

I've always been fairly confident of my chances of success in this case, as I simply can't accept it is reasonable for a brand new £600 computer to completely fail after two years.

Now I have to prepare evidence to submit before the hearing. I can't think of a great deal that I can use - just the original purchase receipt, quote for the cost of repair, and a copy of John Lewis's letter in which they state it is my fault for not buying an Extended Warranty (I can't imagine the judge will be too impressed by this!).

I'm quite shocked that a supposedly reputable company like John Lewis (who I keep hearing have been voted No.1 for customer service in various surveys) could completely refuse to acknowledge their liabilities under the Sale of Goods Act, and are prepared to let this case go to a hearing.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciate
v3rd May 2006 10:05

They've Settled It!
Success!

I have today received an offer of full settlement, plus court costs, from John Lewis.

Here's what the letter says:
I write further to your claim against John Lewis plc in respect of an Apple Emac computer. I have assessed the merits of this claim from a legal perspective and am confident that, should this claim proceed to court, John Lewis plc would be successful in defeating your claim.

However, John Lewis plc prides itself in its commitment to excellent customer service. I am therefore prepared to settle this matter by payment to you of the £270.87 claimed in Full and final settlement of your claim. This offer does not amount to an admission of liability by John Lewis plc and should be regarded as a gesture of goodwill.

I therefore enclose a consent order which you should sign and return to me... etc.. etc..
Well, that gave me a good chuckle.

To me that translates as "we think you've got a fair chance of winning the case in court, and we'd hate the bad publicity if that happened."

The line about excellent customer service is an absolute scream! If this offer is born out of goodwill and customer service, why didn't they make the offer five months ago when I originally complained instead of letting it get to court??!!

Nevertheless, this is a nice little victory for Mr Consumer and I'm very pleased by the outcome! Thanks to all on this forum who gave advice and support.

:T:T:T:T:T:T:T:T:T:T:T

Silk · 23 February 2012 at 8:38PM

eefee wrote: »

Thanks for all your responses, it seems that what I need is an independent expert to verify the phone has been well looked after and that the fault must therefore have been inherent.
Vodafone didn't mention this.

Hi eefee,
That depends which path you take ...if you are going to try using the EU Directive as a lever the good point about it is that you don't need to prove it's an inherent fault ...the fact that it's faulty is enough.

Silk · 23 February 2012 at 8:50PM

prosaver wrote: »

9th April 2006 18:04
Claiming against John Lewis - SOGA - *WON*
I've made a claim in the county court against John Lewis plc for faulty goods under the Sale of Goods Act. Yesterday I received a date for the hearing (6 June) from the court. I wish I'd discovered this excellent website sooner, but thought I'd share my experiences anyway...........................................................

Hi Prosaver,
May I ask why you are quoting a case from Consumer Action Group that was posted on there back in 2006 ?...the case never got to court and was settled by John Lewis well before the case was due to be heard ....it's a completely different company and situation and has little relevance other than an instance of a company backing down when faced with additional cost of defending their position.

prosaver · 23 February 2012 at 9:28PM

Silk wrote: »

Hi Prosaver,
May I ask why you are quoting a case from Consumer Action Group that was posted on there back in 2006 ?...the case never got to court and was settled by John Lewis well before the case was due to be heard ....it's a completely different company and situation and has little relevance other than an instance of a company backing down when faced with additional cost of defending their position.

we are talking about soga thats, why
it was an apple computer and johnny babes lewis would of lost in court and got loads of bad press
simples......:p

23n1th · 23 February 2012 at 9:42PM

Its certainly worth ringing to ombusman as vodafone stated.

If you have the money you could take them to court, where the law is not black and white its certainly up for challenge. I for one think that they are liable for the phone breaking before the end of the contract. The 24 month contract was sold along side the phone as a single package. The phone failing before the end of the contract imo is tantamount to the phone being unfit for purpose.

You would obviously need the engineers report stating the breakage was due to a hardware fault not directly related to you or accident. I would think ware and tare are covered under the fit for purpose part.

Just my opinion mind.

Silk · 23 February 2012 at 9:46PM

prosaver wrote: »

we are talking about soga thats, why
it was an apple computer and johnny babes lewis would of lost in court and got loads of bad press
simples......:p

You're missing the point...it was John Lewis not Vodafone and it was one instance where a company chose not to defend itself in court.
Quite often a company will back down under pressure but most of the time, as in the case you quoted from 6 years ago, it's usualy down to the economics of producing a defence as opposed to giving a bit of "good will"

23n1th · 23 February 2012 at 10:04PM

Silk wrote: »

You're missing the point...it was John Lewis not Vodafone and it was one instance where a company chose not to defend itself in court.
Quite often a company will back down under pressure but most of the time, as in the case you quoted from 6 years ago, it's usualy down to the economics of producing a defence as opposed to giving a bit of "good will"

Couldn't agree more. Is it worth going to court with a customer for £240?

prosaver · 23 February 2012 at 10:54PM

23n1th wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. Is it worth going to court with a customer for £240?

when you buy something
the shop is under a legal binding contract...
john lewis and yourself .
john lewis would have to defend themselves if they were not at fault.
why I hear you ask?
because every tom , !!!!!! and harry would be doing it.
John Lewis also would not lose out as they would recuperate the monies of the phone supplier.