Pinch of salt

L1sa_2

This isn’t a complaints post, it just a little advice for people who have found themselves looking on this forum for help and advice and my experience of using the forum.
I couldn’t afford to pay for a solicitor so I thought I would post my problem in this forum, I thought it was a straight forward problem but wanted some advice.
The problem
I purchase a TV and found a faulty within 3 days went back to the retailer and was told it would just settle in, problem didn’t go away but when I went back it was passed there 28day policy, they told me I can only have a repair.
When I posted the problem 90% of the advice I was given stated the same as the retailers, that the only option I had was for a repair, even when the SOGA was mentioned I was still advised a repair is my best option.
Before I when on this forum I had no legal knowledge concerning consumer law, but when member started quoting SOGA, CPRs DSR I thought I better read up on the subject.
This kind of made the thread worse as I started to quote from the SOGA, as I could not understand when a law clearly states I have the option for an exchange, also with the fact I told the retailer about the fault 3 day after I received the goods. Why people were saying I can only have a repair.
I was luck two of the people giving advice was saying the same as myself, but the thread basically turned into an argument.
Some of the advice I was given was

· They are, under the SOGA, entitled to repair it first. (He has given over 10000posts)
· It would be highly unlikely you will be getting an exchange

And the bit that upset me was comments like

· So why is the OP moaning about:
· Implying that I lied
· As per usual a bunch of newbies don't hear what they want to and go off on one.
When people look for advice on this forum they are usually already hitting a brick wall and the last thing they want is faults advice and made to feel like rubbish.

Almost all the advice I was given was incorrect, there was one chap who has made over 10000 posts and the advice he gave was incorrect.
I was lucky that one of the people given advice is qualified in consumer law. I did a search on him and found another forum he works on and there he gave me advice on how to correctly layout a complaints letter and helped me with advice on civil action and because of this I took legal action against the retailer and won,
It is a shame he does not post on this forum any more as he will not be able to help others in the same situation that I was in.

People might want to think I am just ranting on and if I look for advice on the internet I am to expect bad advice with the good advice.
But the sad thing is some people will be like me and think because this is a forum is run by martin lewis moneysavingexperts that they will vet the posts or at least check to see if the advice given out is correct.
If you are like me and find yourself looking on this forum for advice make sure you check the advice with someone qualified in law because if I took most of the advice I was given I would have given away my consumer rights.

maninthestreet

It would be impractial (and hugely expensive) to vet every single post made on these forums.

somethingcorporate

IMPORTANT!
This is an open forum - anyone can post.



If you want legal advice go and see a lawyer (and pay for it).


If you want the advice of a bunch of amateur enthusiasts that you do not pay for an opinion then welcome to the forum.


You cannot expect high quality, legal advice for nothing and especially not from an open forum. Sorry that you expected such, if you believed that was the case then you ignored the message from Martin Lewis about the nature of these forums (scroll up, it's right there).

Edit: I just read your original thread. I would agree with most of the regulars that posted there. I think you missed the opportunity to reject under SOGA by being fobbed off instore and not rejecting right away so they were within the law to offer you a repair. If you could prove that you went in within those 3 days then I have no doubt you would win the court case but if you couldn't then the rest of the posts that you disliked appear to me to be spot on.

hunters

I assume then OP we can take your posts with a pinch of salt too?

bod1467

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3737645

For the curious.

McKneff

I cant imagine how anybody can actually believe a salesman who says of an electrical item 'It'll settle in'

A couch or something similar, yes, but a telly,:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I know what I would have told this salesman who thought I was stupid enough to take that in.

fluffnutter

You say that 'almost all the advice' [you received from this site] 'was incorrect'.

Do you want people to defend themselves, or are you simply letting them know that they were wrong so that they might improve on their advice giving? Perhaps you're just trying to rile them a little.

Whichever way, starting a further thread saying 'You lot got it wrong' to the very same people who tried to help in the first place is not going to elicit much positive response is it?

somethingcorporate

There is not any evidence that we actually got it wrong. Just because Curry's settled (or didn't turn up to defend in this case) it is often cheaper to pay people to go away than to contest something on complex legal principles for the sake of a few hundred quid.

CoolHotCold

Somethingcorporate is right.

There also no guarantee you would of won the court case either as it was your word against theirs.

Almost none of the posts were incorrect, howevers your is full of incorrect statements such as

I took legal action against the retailer and won

, no you didn't they settled as a more cost effective way of resolving the issue.

The timeline went like this in your previous thread, Purchased TV, 3 days later supposably went into store and asked for advice, waited 6 weeks and then reported to retailer in a durable format then 6 months later you post here without any indication of what timescale engineers were suppose to visit.

The SoGA has grey parts which judges and lawyers take to mean reasonable person on the street, you didn't get the advice you wanted to hear from reasonable people (about 90/95% of replies all said the same thing).

No one lied at Currys from my understanding, the internet is always a place you'll hear from only one persons view, from the date that you informed them it was outside of a reasonable timeframe and a repair was suitable, like I said in the previous thread there is no proof (that you've supplied) that you even went in, or asked, or what advice was really given except your version of events.


Also, Vents/Praise/Warnings is a better place for this.

Mista_C

McKneff wrote: »

I cant imagine how anybody can actually believe a salesman who says of an electrical item 'It'll settle in'

A couch or something similar, yes, but a telly,:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I know what I would have told this salesman who thought I was stupid enough to take that in.

In defence of the OP the issue appears to have been due to speaker vibration. New speakers can require a period of 'breaking in' during which the drivers will stretch and contract to their relevant positions.

There are other electrical items that may go through settling in periods also. Computers usually go through a 24 hour stress test. LCD screens go through a settling in period called burn-in when during this time the pixels are rapidly 'switched'. This is part of the process used for grading screens.

I suppose much of it depends on your definition of settling in though.

mynameistallulah

somethingcorporate wrote: »

There is not any evidence that we actually got it wrong. Just because Curry's settled (or didn't turn up to defend in this case) it is often cheaper to pay people to go away than to contest something on complex legal principles for the sake of a few hundred quid.

Excellent point - a friend was recently boasting that he had won a "legal battle" against Apple. Upon further questioning it transpired he had told them about the well known secret EU law(!), and they apparently apologised profusely and bowed down to his superior knowledge.

I did suggest that perhaps they repaired his ipad for the simple reason that it was good customer service to do so, but he was happier to continue in the belief that he had "won" due to his research into the law according to Google.