Sensor gone in camera only 4 years old

Mandyjane73

I have a Panasonic camera and have been told the censor has gone in it - something which one expert person told me he has never known before.

The camera is only 4 years old and I still have the receipts. I've been back to Jessops where I brought it from and tried to assert my rights under the consumer goods protection act but they say that the fault has to be reported with in the first year? Are they correct.

I recently read an article in Which magazine which says you have a limited time to report the fault and they are say that is what it means by with in the first year.

Who's right? Do I have a case and should I take it further??

wealdroam

Have a read of MSE's Consumer Rights article.

In there you will find that you have up to six years to make a claim.

You may (almost certainly will) need to prove that the fault is inherent.

bod1467

They are not right, but they're not completely wrong either. You have 6 years from date of purchase to chase a remedy under the Sale of Goods Act (SOGA), although whether something should reasonably be expected to last that long very much depends on the price paid and product quality.

Up to 6 months any fault is assumed to be inherent (present at the time of purchase) and the retailer is obliged to offer a remedy. (Repair, replace or refund, though any refund can take account of usage). After 6 months the retailer can insist on the purchaser getting an engineer's report to prove that the fault was inherent and not due to misuse. If the report confirms an inherent fault then the retailer must offer a remedy (as above) and also refund the cost of the report.

As your camera is 4 years old then the question now is - what model is it and how much did you pay? The answers will determine whether there's any mileage in pursuing this.

PS - a censor is someone who rates films and videos.

ETA: I should learn to type faster. :rotfl:

Mandyjane73

LOL I knew it was the wrong censor but couldn't remember the correct spelling.

The camera is a Panasonic Luminx DMC FX35. I paid £220 and I've hard used it as have another camera this one was just for occassional use when the other big one was too big to take out. Its not damaged, scratched or chipped. In wht I would call shop brought state.

bod1467

Well if Jessops are not playing ball then you'll need a report, probably costing at least £60., with the risk that it might not find an inherent fault.

Even if it does, Jessops will only offer a partial refund ... after 4 years and £220 purchase price I'd be surprised if you got much more than about £50.

Forwandert

May be worth bearing in mind what your expert told you before going to the expense of a report. If its a fault they've never known before chances of it being inherant won't be that high.

Mandyjane73

OK - thank you for your help everyone. Will consider my next move.

arcon5

They could of course argue 4 years is a reasonable life span for a £220 camera. It's not exactly a top of the range model at this price.

paddyrg

£220 works out at £55/year, or under a fiver a month. A £220 camera is just probably not meant to last much beyond 4 years in honesty.

neilmcl

paddyrg wrote: »

£220 works out at £55/year, or under a fiver a month. A £220 camera is just probably not meant to last much beyond 4 years in honesty.

I'd tend to agree. Just because SOGA gives you 6 years in which to seek a remedy it doesn't mean that an item should last this long, far from it.

agrinnall

I have a similar camera (a FX33), also bought about 4 years ago. To be honest, if mine stopped working now I'd bin it and buy a new one, you'd probably be able to get one with more functions, a better sensor, and a reasonable lens (although maybe not quite as good given that it's a Leica) for half the original price.