Debenhams Plus

amf

Right, I need to sue these bunch of rogues, who won't refund on a faulty item only a few months old. They won't repair or replace either, but I'd prefer a refund anyway. Problem is....who do I sue? Let me explain;-

1. .Debenhams Plus website states “1.1.2 "Seller" means Debenhams Plus, (operated on behalf of Debenhams plc by Easycom, Company Number 04171412, VAT Number GB 721 3118 80) whose registered office is at Unit A, Trident Business Park, Leeds Road, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire.”. Note that no postcode is supplied!


2. My invoice from Debenhams Plus shows “Registered in Registered in England & Wales: 04171412” Per Companies House company number 04171412 relates to BUY IT DIRECT LTD, UNIT A TRIDENT BUSINESS PARK, LEEDS ROAD, HUDDERSFIELD, WEST YORKSHIRE HD2 1UA

So it seems that the owner of the Trading Name Debenhams Plus is trying to muddy the waters as regards the identification of the seller whom buyers are purchasing from. This is very naughty, to say the least. My own view is that I should be suing Debenhams plc. Does anyone have any more insight on this?

WTFH

What is the product, what is the fault, and what communication have you had with them so far?

amf

WTFH wrote: »

What is the product, what is the fault, and what communication have you had with them so far?

1. Zoostorm Playtab. 3 months old
2. a) Non accessible internal memory - Zoostorm helpline referred to this as the memory being dropped)
b) Power switch stuck inside case.
c/ Repeated hangs and crashes.
3. They have returned tab to Zoostorm and say that Zoostorm have said that they've been inside the case and all is OK. They say fault b) caused by customer, but offer no evidence of this.

I pointed out that the tablet is less than 6 months old so SOGA says that tablet is faulty at date of purchase unless they prove otherwise. They just repeat that b) is a customer caused fault.

They also say that the screen has a hairline crack. I have told them that there was no such crack when it left my house.

I'm quite happy to sue using the small claims procedures and have asked Debenhams CS to confirm who owns D+. They have ignored this request, hence my post.

WTFH

A stuck power switch could be the cause of some of the issues, but how does a power switch get stuck inside the case - that will be their question.
If it has worked for 3 months, then it wasn't stuck when purchased, so somehow it has become stuck since then. Otherwise you would have returned it sooner.
A broken power switch could cause the device to "crash".

Can you explain what you mean by "non accessible internal memory", as it's not a technical term I've ever heard before.

amf

The Zoostorm's power switch is poorly designed and is difficult to turn on and off. I use a nail only. The power switch got stuck inside the case when the tablet was re-booting following a return to factory settings. This action was suggested by Zoostorm technical helpline to solve the dropped memory issue.

The memory issue - I had an SD Card in the tablet. All videos etc were located on there. I received a warning message one day advising me that memory was near the max and this could affect the efficiency of the tablet. When I looked at this via explorer it was apparent that all the apps I'd downloaded were on the system RAM - that was what the warning message was about. I was trying to transfer the apps to the internal (16GB) memory but this could not be seen in explorer. I hooked the tablet to the PC and the internal memory was not visible. At that point I phoned Zoostorm, with the advice being as previously stated.

I've today received a letter from Debenhams CS stating that they have spoken to the suppliers who have found no inherent manufacturing fault and that "the deterioration has been caused by wear and tear". They offer only a chargeable repair. Given that the tablet is only just over 3 months old it is for them to demonstrate that the faults were not present at the date of sale, per the SOGA. I think that their writing about problems being caused by wear and tear on a new tablet is to my advantage.

Anyway, I'm inclined on a LBA, pointing out the weaknesses in their argument, before commencing formal action.