Argos - Returns policy

flywaspmetaphor

Hi,

apologies if there are a million threads along the same theme as this but just wanted to clarify my own understanding.

In May I bought a TV from Argos. At one point it wouldn't turn on however this only happened briefly and seemed ok afterwards so thought nothing more of it. Last week however it wouldn't turn on at all with the standby light repeatedly flashing.

On Monday I took it back to Argos and they were adamant it would need to be sent off for repair. They plugged it in in store and it turned on (how embarrassing) so I took it home. Monday evening the TV worked fine however last night and again this morning the same problem arose. There is evidently an intermittent fault.

I have spoken to their helper on twitter and again they are adamant that they will have to send the TV off to be diagnosed and an attempt to repair made.

I'm not happy with this as I've only had the TV 3 months and would rather they replaced it with the same TV.

Under the sales of goods act 1979 I believe I am entitled to this without the need for them to send it off to be examined. Is this the case, even if they plug it in in the store and it appears to work again.

Following Monday I have taken video footage on my phone to show there is a fault as I felt they were very accusative in store

Many thanks

bod1467

Argos are (probably) correct in that they have the right to offer a repair in the first instance, given that you've had the TV for a long enough period to be deemed to have "accepted" it.

Under SOGA they must offer to repair, replace or refund. Effectively their choice.

flywaspmetaphor

The sales of goods act 1979 states that within the first 6 months if there is a fault it is deemed faulty from point of sale. In this instance I have taken the TV back within the relevant period

Hintza

flywaspmetaphor wrote: »

The sales of goods act 1979 states that within the first 6 months if there is a fault it is deemed faulty from point of sale. In this instance I have taken the TV back within the relevant period

Yes and they will fix the fault.

shaun_from_Africa

flywaspmetaphor wrote: »

The sales of goods act 1979 states that within the first 6 months if there is a fault it is deemed faulty from point of sale. In this instance I have taken the TV back within the relevant period

All the 6 month period is for is to decide who has to prove that a fault exists and nothing to do with the remedy that must be offered.
Argos are totally in line with the SOGA to offer a repair for the television.

flywaspmetaphor

Three months is not long enough to identify an intermitten fault. I don't understand why they cannot just exchange it

Fosterdog

They won't just exchange it because until it has been sent away they don't know exactly what the issue is. It could be something that will just take a day or two and then it works perfectly for a number of years or they may find it is beyond repair and offer a replacement.

They are within the law in insisting that it goes for repair. Any repair is only going to take longer the more you argue against it instead of just letting them repair it.

Three months is more than enough time to identify and intermittent fault, once the fault has occurred more than once you turn it on and off again and again to see how often it happens not wait until it does it just once or twice three months down the line

flywaspmetaphor

Thanks for the advice (most of you) guess I just have to grin and bear it.......thanks anyway

McKneff

flywaspmetaphor wrote: »

I asked a perfectly valid question. Feel free to gloat in your smugness but you're really impressing no one

No need for that, it was a perfectly reasonable response, because you had obviously read it but didnt understand it.

We are asked to be nice to Newbies but when you get reactions like this from people it is difficult, being nice works both ways.

Dave101t

they were trying to fix the fault and all you can do is bawl on about getting a new one. and it worked in store. why not demand compensation as well?

flywaspmetaphor

McKneff wrote: »

No need for that, it was a perfectly reasonable response, because you had obviously read it but didnt understand it.

We are asked to be nice to Newbies but when you get reactions like this from people it is difficult, being nice works both ways.

Your message did not read like it was being helpful and I think it would put off newbies posting if they feel they are going to get sarcastic responses (which is how it read to me regardless of your intention).

Whilst others pointed out that the answer may not be what I'm looking for I accepted this