Retailer Warranties - Denied Repair/Replacement

Parachute7510

Hiya. New to the forums. Signed up because I am a very unhappy customer who needs some advice from those more experienced than me.

To cut a very long story short.... I purchased a TV from Currys in 2010, with a 5 year whateverhappens warranty. I was told my TV would be repaired if it was damaged (even accidental damage) or replaced if it couldn't be repaired. Sounded good at the time... Especially with kids...

2 months ago my TV was damaged. I have a 4 year old child who is going through the 'wind up parents' phase. We woke up, got out of bed and I proceeded to make him breakfast. I made him a drink first - warm milk which he likes to drink from a sports bottle just like his Dads. I give him the drink first as I always do, something to keep him occupied until his toast has been made. He will take it to his play table in his playroom and drink it whilst he waits for me to make his toast. He will often 'read' a book or play with his cars.

I brought his toast to him, went back to the kitchen and made some for myself, including a tea, and went back in to join him and watch some TV. We switch all of our plugs off at night before we go to bed - have done for years.

That morning I went to switch the TV on and I noticed liquid running down the front and back of the TV, and down the wall.

The TV is mounted on the wall, but quite low down. It's in a children's playroom, so needs to be at a height for them to be able to watch it.

The plug is situated behind the top of the TV - out of the reach of the kids.

It didn't take a genius to work out what had happened - the child has sprayed his milk over the wall/tv. Naturally I didn't switch the TV on.

Composed myself, got the child ready for the day and proceeded to look for my TV documentation.

To cut an even longer story short...

Phoned whateverhappens. They took my story then cut me off. I phoned back and spoke to another person who told me my notes had been saved. He said someone would get back to me within 24hrs...

It took me 3 weeks and several phonecalls to them to get anything to happen with this.

They said I needed to write to someone called 'Gary Perryment' of the Claims Investigation Department explaining what had happened.

Why couldn't they tell me this in the first phonecall?

3 weeks later I get a phonecall from some kind of investigator on behalf of Gary Perryment. He asked me what happened. I explained in the same detail I sent in the letter and he told me he would be advising Gary Perryment to reject my claim, that my whateverhappens policy didn't cover abuse/neglect/misuse.

Totally shaken and shocked I allowed the phonecall to play out. He told me someone would be in touch shortly.

A week later I received confirmation stating my 'claim' would be rejected.

Can someone please help me/explain to me what is going on here?

I bought a Sony TV and a 5 year guarantee which states I am covered for accidental damage. Now I am seen to be 'making a claim' and I am receiving phonecalls from private investigators? On top of that, my TV won't be looked at.

I should add here, that there may not be damage to my TV, but I would be a fool to attempt to turn it on until it is assessed properly.

What has that company become?

Are these scare tactics?

The investigator went over the incident then quizzed me on whether or not I had worked for the company, claimed before etc...

He first told me he was independent of the company and been appointed by the company to carry out an external, independant investigation. Later in the conversation he said 'the company just empploy me to investigate claims'.... How is this gentleman impartial? He is employed by Currys/DSG!

Can anyone advise me on this policy/warranty?

Surely my issue comes under 'mishaps' as mentioned on my original documentation. How can they jump from there to misuse/neglect/abuse without seeing what exactly happened?

I felt the investigator was trying to intimidate be and deter me from acting against a rejected claim but I told him I wouldn't be letting this drop. And I don't intend to.

Does anyone have have advice for me?

P.S Sorry if this is in the wrong forum?

visidigi

So you haven't even tried to turn it on?

ILW

visidigi wrote: »

So you haven't even tried to turn it on?

Probably work fine.

molerat

In your third paragraph you have hung yourself. It sounds like the liquid was deliberately sprayed over the TV so "The cost of repairing or replacing the product which fails because anyone neglects, abuses or misuses the product" comes into play. The damage was due to a deliberate act.

cockaleekee

I would agree with the others - unless it was drenched, the tv could well still work.

I'm torn on this - if the damage had been caused by an adult, it would without question be wilful damage. As it was a child that caused the damage I'm not sure - I expect their argument would be that leaving the child with a bottle that doubles as a squirty toy was neglectful on your part.

Parachute7510

So should I keep my child in a cage away from anything that he could possibly reach... just incase he decides he wants to play/damage the TV?

And by 'decides', I mean that in the way any small toddler decides things i.e. with no real perception of right or wrong.

Agreed - if it was an adult, I wouldn't be pursuing it. However, this is a child. Who has accidentally damaged the TV. He didn't know he was going to damage it. He doesn't know that electricity and liquid = danger.

RE: Turning TV on.

Really? I should risk this?

'Probably' will work doesn't cut it for me. I'm not risking doing any damage to my property or damaging the TV further.

Now this 'claim' is at this stage, I would be reluctant to touch the TV in terms of switching it on. I made them aware the TV was removed from the wall and placed in the garage. It wasn't smelling too good.

I purchased this agreement because it was sold to me as total protection for my television - through accidental damage or mechanical breakdown. We were told when buying the tv that if the kids were to knock it over or break the screen we would be covered. Thinking about this for a few minutes we decided it was best to buy a wall mount/bracket for it and keep it out of the way.

Surely I have some comeback on this policy?

cockaleekee

No need to cage up the child. A need to keep an eye on him around electrical items when he has liquids? Yes, I would say so. Would you sit him in front of the tv with a water pistol? This is in effect what you have done.

I fail to see the problem with trying to turn on the tv. What do you think will happen?

Parachute7510

cockaleekee wrote: »

No need to cage up the child. A need to keep an eye on him around electrical items when he has liquids? Yes, I would say so. Would you sit him in front of the tv with a water pistol? This is in effect what you have done.

I fail to see the problem with trying to turn on the tv. What do you think will happen?

As I mentioned above, the TV wasn't switched on.

When it first happened I was reluctant to switch it on because I know electricity and liquid do not match.

Now, after such a period, I am reluctant to turn it on because of the stage of this claim and was has developed since I reported the fault.

To be honest, I don't know what I would expect to happen. If the TV hasn't been switched on since the accident, so I don't know what will happen. I just don't want to switch it on until it's been cleared by a professional.

I don't understand why they didn't send someone out to do this in the first place.

I'm not an electrician cockaleekee, so I don't know what would happen but my instincts are telling me to err on the side of caution. Especially with electricity and liquid.

Are you an electrician? Do you know what will happen or what could happen out of interest?

cockaleekee

I'm not an electrician, but I've grown up with one, plus I've got the common sense to know that after such a length of time the water is no longer a risk - it will have dried out long ago. Yes, it may have caused damage at the time, but you won't know unless you try.

I did not say that the tv was turned on? I simply noted that the child was in front of a tv with liquids.

vuvuzela

Parachute7510 wrote: »

Do you know what will happen or what could happen out of interest?

What is likely to happen - nothing. The milk (if it actually got onto the circuitboard) will have long dried now and is unlikely to have left any sticky residue across tracks (eg what coke would leave after it dries). I would say there is a very good chance of it just working.

What could happen - if there are tracks shorted , then the circuitboard could simply short out and it won't work. Less likely, the PSU could be shorted and it could go 'pop' (literally, a popping sound) and the fuse internally to the TV could go, this may also cause the RCD in your house circuit to flip. If it does, you unplug the telly, and flip the switch back on the RCD.

Personally, I think you've been a bit over-cautious.

Parachute7510

vuvuzela wrote: »

What is likely to happen - nothing. The milk (if it actually got onto the circuitboard) will have long dried now and is unlikely to have left any sticky residue across tracks (eg what coke would leave after it dries). I would say there is a very good chance of it just working.

What could happen - if there are tracks shorted , then the circuitboard could simply short out and it won't work. Less likely, the PSU could be shorted and it could go 'pop' (literally, a popping sound) and the fuse internally to the TV could go, this may also cause the RCD in your house circuit to flip. If it does, you unplug the telly, and flip the switch back on the RCD.

Personally, I think you've been a bit over-cautious.

Thanks for this advice.

I appreciate there is a good chance of it switching on and working fine, but if it didn't... my problem multiplies.

I have told them I haven't switched the TV on since it happened - and I haven't. If It switch it on now and something happens as a result of that I am afraid of what these consequences could have to my 'claim'. Will they try to claim it was already damaged and I made up a story to cover? Will they claim that I silly to turn it on and therefore it was my own fault?

I have no idea what they could do with that information if it did go wrong.

I fully appreciate I might be over sensitive, I just don't want to have forked out all this money for nothing, whilst having a broken tv.

My issue here isn't whether or not the TV will work, it is the fact they haven't sent anyone to look at it instead they told me I abused/misuse/neglected my television. At what stage is it abuse/neglect instead of a 'mishap' and which takes precedence over the other? In this case, and the many others I have read over the past few days, it seems the abuse/misues/neglect gets precendence because it saves Currys/DSG money/resources on fixing/relplacing.

I would be more than happy to have someone could out and inspect my TV and deem it safe to use.

The issue isn't my parenting nor whether or not my tv will work if I switch it on, it's the agreement I purchased from Currys and why they aren't honouring it.

I appreciate all of you replies.