Aargh! Presumably nothing I can do? (Section 75)

itsanne

Long story short.

I purchased a Sony laptop for roughly £400 from Laskeys in 2011, paying by Tesco credit card. It was repaired by Sony under guarantee. Unfortunately, I sent the receipt with it when it was collected!:( (Sony gave me the impression, over the phone, I had to include it, have since said they never ask for it and have no idea where it will now be.)

Same fault arose again 4 months later - one month out of both the original guarantee and the repair's guarantee. In the meantime Laskeys, as part of the Comet group, went bust.

I made a Section 75 claim. Tesco asked for a report about the fault, after being made aware of the receipt problem. (Sony had confirmed they had received the receipt.) The report cost £35.

Today I received Tesco's decision: the claim will not be met because the receipt isn't available.

I take it there's nothing to be done about the Section 75 claim? What about the cost of the report?

Thanks, in hope though not really in anticipation.

I'll try to take my mind off it by getting on with the tiling now.:cool:

opinions4u

Did you order online?

Have you got any email proof of purchase anywhere? That might satisfy Tesco that the purchase was for the laptop.

At the very least ask Tesco to reimburse you the £35.

itsanne

opinions4u wrote: »

Did you order online?

Have you got any email proof of purchase anywhere? That might satisfy Tesco that the purchase was for the laptop.

At the very least ask Tesco to reimburse you the £35.

Thanks for replying.

Yes, I ordered online, but Sod's Law has followed this laptop all the way. I always save email receipts (and paper ones!) but this one doesn't seem to exist.

To complicate things further, and I know better now, I paid via Paypal - just because it was quicker at the time.The credit card statement noted both Laskeys and Paypal as the transaction. That's what I thought might prove problematic, but Tesco asked for the receipt despite that and then the report, so I thought we were okay.

It's taken five months for Tesco to reject the claim!

pvt

itsanne wrote: »

I paid via Paypal - just because it was quicker at the time.

I am pretty sure that if you use PayPal you disconnect the CC provider from the actual transaction, and S75 wouldn't therefore apply anyway.

In much the same way as using your CC to withdraw £300 from an ATM to then go into a shop and buy something with it.

pvt

Could you not go back to Sony and argue that the repair was substandard if it failed again after 4 months?

itsanne

pvt wrote: »

Could you not go back to Sony and argue that the repair was substandard if it failed again after 4 months?

Tried that. Repairs are guaranteed for three months. Told that if we'd bought the laptop direct from a Sony shop they would have considered taking it on as a goodwill gesture (words to that effect)! :mad: Used to think highly of Sony - not any more!

pvt

itsanne wrote: »

Told that if we'd bought the laptop direct from a Sony shop they would have considered taking it on as a goodwill gesture

Hmmmm. It's more likely that they know you could probably come after them with the SoG act. You can reasonably argue that a laptop should have lasted more than 2 years, therefore it was not fit for purpose. In which case the retailer is liable to replace or repair it. If the retailer was SONY itself then it knows it might as well repair it than you take it back to their shop and demandd your SoG rights.

chattychappy

Paypal is the likely killer. Not having the receipt shouldn't be fatal - afterall CC transactions show up on statements. YES, you could have bought something else for the same amount, but ultimately in court you only have to prove on the balance of probabilities. I don't think a judge would have a problem with a lack of receipt if you have the statement - unless the CC can produce something to show that the transaction related to something else. S75 doesn't require a receipt - so it would be up to the judge to make a finding of fact.

It's normal for CCs to throw up reasons not to pay out on S75, because they have to foot the bill.

But in this case, I think you're sunk because of Paypal (though I think it's never been litigated on).

chanz4

Contact sony head office, they repaired my tv out of warranty and I didn't buy direct

SnowTiger

pvt wrote: »

Hmmmm. It's more likely that they know you could probably come after them with the SoG act. You can reasonably argue that a laptop should have lasted more than 2 years, therefore it was not fit for purpose. In which case the retailer is liable to replace or repair it. If the retailer was SONY itself then it knows it might as well repair it than you take it back to their shop and demandd your SoG rights.

The problem is that the retailer, Laskys (part of Comet), has gone bust; hence the OP wants to go the Section 75 route.

As chanz4 says, appealing to the manufacturer might the the best option. Send them a copy of the report along with a nice covering letter.

Presumably the report indicates that it was an 'inherent fault'.

Wywth

pvt wrote: »

Hmmmm. It's more likely that they know you could probably come after them with the SoG act. You can reasonably argue that a laptop should have lasted more than 2 years, therefore it was not fit for purpose. In which case the retailer is liable to replace or repair it. If the retailer was SONY itself then it knows it might as well repair it than you take it back to their shop and demandd your SoG rights.

Most (perhaps all) Sony stores are not actually owned by Sony.

Many have fallen into administration over recent years.
http://www.insolvencynews.com/article/13595/corporate/sony-centre-operators-fall-into-administration