Advice Required re TV issues

Molly24

Hi there,

It's my first post on here and I am looking for some advice with regards to some issue I am having with regards to a tv (Sharp LC32SH130) I bought last April.

In the last couple of months I have had issues with both the sound and the tv switching off and then taking upwards of 3 minutes to switch on again. I contacted Richer Sounds who told me as the tv was under 12 months old I would need to contact Sharp to discuss. I contacted Sharp 3 and half weeks ago who arranged for the tv to be collected for investigation.
Since the TV was collected I had not heard from Sharp and therefore I called them this week to be advised that both the main board and sound board had to be replaced and these parts were currently on order. When I queried how long this would take they could not confirm and I was told someone would call back but no call has been recieved.
I have been left without a tv since it went for repair and had no correspondance from Sharp as to how long a repair will take. Richer Sounds have also been less than helpful by just passing the issue over to Sharp. I am also concerned that this will be dragged out until april as to when the 1 year warrenty will expire.

Can anyone advise on what rights I have so I can try and move this forward.

Thanks very much in advance.

Richer_Sounds_Company_Representative

Hi there,

I was sorry to read of the problems with the repair of your TV.

So that I can look into this matter further, and ensure all is resolved to your satisfaction asap, please would you email me with your repair and contact details? My e-mail address is John.p.clayton@richersounds.com

Meanwhile, my apologies for the obvious inconvenience, and I hope to hear from you soon.

Many thanks,

John Clayton
Operations Director
Richer Sounds

ThumbRemote

Richer_Sounds_Company_Representative wrote: »

Meanwhile, my apologies for the obvious inconvenience, and I hope to hear from you soon.

It appears that the OP has been given incorrect advice by the story, namely that they "would need to contact Sharp to discuss". The OP has statutory rights against Richer Sounds as retailer.

This appears to be an attempt by Richer Sounds to deny the OP their statutory rights, which is itself an offence under The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

Is this a policy of Richer Sounds? If not, will you be reminding your stores that, while they can give customers the option of contacting the manufacturer, they cannot avoid their legal responsibilities?

Richer_Sounds_Company_Representative

Hi there,

Thank you for your post.

Of course we are aware of our obligations to our customers. Although Sharp actually carry out any repairs using their own network of engineers, we remain responsible to our customers, hence my post above offering to help.

Meanwhile, feel free to contact me directly if I can be of any further help.

Thanks again,

John Clayton
Operations Director
Richer Sounds

Molly24

Hi,

Apologies for the delay in responding, password issued here which have taken time to resolve.

John, thanks for your offer, I will contact you shortly, however, still no word from Sharp which is most disappointing.

SuperHan

Did the OP mention their statutory right and that they wanted a remedy under the SoGA? If so, then Richer Sounds should have offered the remedy.

If the OP took the TV in to the shop and asked for a fixed television, I think RS are perfectly in their rights to advise contact with the manufacturer. If there is a manufacturers warranty in place, this is the first port of call for a repair. There's no reason to push the retailer in to having to provide a remedy. Only if and when the manufacturers warranty doesn't deliver does the retailer really need to get involved.

Obviously, this doesn't apply if a remedy is specifically requested under SoGA, but otherwise, if the customer wants a fixed TV and is happy to contact the manufacturer, why shouldn't the retailer give instructions to do just that? RS are obviously willing to help - per their post here - not shirking their reponsibilities like some retailers admittedly, and wrongly, do.

Hintza

ThumbRemote wrote: »

This appears to be an attempt by Richer Sounds to deny the OP their statutory rights, which is itself an offence under The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

There are many items especially of an electronic nature that the consumer ids far better served by dealing with the manufacturer themselves. If for no other reason than to cut out the middleman (ie the retailer) and to move things along faster.


Having said that some retailers now buy goods from manufacturers what to not come with any warranty (ie retailer buys it cheaper and arranges their own warranty) so iin many cases it is probably still advisable to at least discuss with the retailer in the first instance.

ThumbRemote

SuperHan wrote: »

If there is a manufacturers warranty in place, this is the first port of call for a repair.

What makes you think that?

ThumbRemote

Hintza wrote: »

There are many items especially of an electronic nature that the consumer ids far better served by dealing with the manufacturer themselves. If for no other reason than to cut out the middleman (ie the retailer) and to move things along faster.

I agree, there can be cases where dealing with the manufacturer is a better route. However there are also plenty of pitfalls which consumers aren't necessarily aware of. The terms of a warranty can be significantly worse than the SoGA, and leave less legal protection.

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 specifically covers both misleading actions and misleading omissions. Telling a customer they must speak to the manufacturer (as, from the OPs account, Richer Sounds did) is a misleading action. Telling a customer the store can deal with it, but it will probably be quicker to deal with the manufacturer themselves, would have been acceptable. *

* Footnote - unless, of course, there were other terms in the warranty that would have left the customer worse off, eg they'd have to pay postage costs or similar. These would have to be brought to the customers attention first. Hence before suggesting the customer uses a warranty, the retailer needs to be aware of the details of that warranty.

Molly24

All,

Thanks for your comments, for clarity I contacted Richer Sounds directly in the first instance as the television was bought directly from them and it was my understanding that my contract was with them rather than Sharp.

I was also under the impression that I can reasonably expect a product to last for suitable length of time and slightly longer than 10 months.

Molly24

SuperHan wrote: »

Did the OP mention their statutory right and that they wanted a remedy under the SoGA? If so, then Richer Sounds should have offered the remedy.

If the OP took the TV in to the shop and asked for a fixed television, I think RS are perfectly in their rights to advise contact with the manufacturer. If there is a manufacturers warranty in place, this is the first port of call for a repair. There's no reason to push the retailer in to having to provide a remedy. Only if and when the manufacturers warranty doesn't deliver does the retailer really need to get involved.

Obviously, this doesn't apply if a remedy is specifically requested under SoGA, but otherwise, if the customer wants a fixed TV and is happy to contact the manufacturer, why shouldn't the retailer give instructions to do just that? RS are obviously willing to help - per their post here - not shirking their reponsibilities like some retailers admittedly, and wrongly, do.

Hi ,

Unfortunately for me I was unaware of SOGA until reading this board.

I did not contact Richer sounds and ask for fixed TV I asked for their help as I bought the tv from them and would have expected it to last longer than 10 months.