Samsung 'Repair' Centre V Supply of Sales and Services Act 1992

sarah_b_2

Retrogamer wrote: »

I think Samsung might also be thinking that whatever caused the crack might also have caused the repair to fail prematurely.

Is the crack beside the charger port?

The crack is at the top of the phone, and it goes diagonally towards the right, about 3 cms long. Samsung have said on the phone, emails and in writing that the crack is cosmetic (I made a point of that) so the crack is unrelated to the problem.
Had a phone call from customer services, asking why am I considering court action when they are ''in the right''. Again, they misread what I said. They thought, again, I was doing it under the Sales of Goods Act. I told them the legislation, pointed out which part of it applied and asked them what they though. They repeated the warranty.
In the end, they realised that i was complaining because a repair has failed and have decided to escalate matters and talk to the service centre manager regarding a repair or refund. So I shall see, but not holding my breath.

sarah_b_2

So, another twist in this.
Turns out, that Samsung didnt repair my phone. It was a subcontractor by the name of ''Avono UK Ltd'' who fixed the phone and payment. Although on my statement is says Samsung, the address was Samsung and the phone calls to and from the Service Centre said they were ''Samsung''. Therefore, the liability is with Avono not Samsung.
So I am having to start this process, all over again. This time with Avono. I will ring the CAB consumer helpline again, but why they didn't tell me that in the first place I have no idea.
Samsung also stated that they were unwilling to help me as the repair has been longer ''than 3 months'' and basically its not their problem.
Not impressed with their customer services department at all and how they treat and deal with complaints. Its starting to stress me out, so I am going to leave it until after Christmas before I do any chasing. Thank you all for your invaluable advice, my plan is to communicate with Avono and if no luck, put in a section 75 through my credit card.

wealdroam

sarah_b wrote: »

So, another twist in this.
Turns out, that Samsung didnt repair my phone. It was a subcontractor by the name of ''Avono UK Ltd'' who fixed the phone and payment. Although on my statement is says Samsung, the address was Samsung and the phone calls to and from the Service Centre said they were ''Samsung''. Therefore, the liability is with Avono not Samsung.
So I am having to start this process, all over again. This time with Avono. I will ring the CAB consumer helpline again, but why they didn't tell me that in the first place I have no idea.
Samsung also stated that they were unwilling to help me as the repair has been longer ''than 3 months'' and basically its not their problem.
Not impressed with their customer services department at all and how they treat and deal with complaints. Its starting to stress me out, so I am going to leave it until after Christmas before I do any chasing. Thank you all for your invaluable advice, my plan is to communicate with Avono and if no luck, put in a section 75 through my credit card.

Avono may well have been the people who did the poor repair, but they did that work on behalf of Samsung.

You arranged Samsung to do the repair and they of course can subcontract the work, but Samsung always remain responsible to you work the quality of that work.

You have no contract with Avono, nor have you ever had.
In this case Avono are only answerable to Samsung.

Now, it appears that Samsung are now saying that it is over three months since the repair was done, they are no longer responsible to you for that repair... I guess they only guarantee repairs for three months.

I think I would be considering whether they are able to wash their hands after three months... I'm not sure.

andykom

A situation not dissimilar to yours I'm afraid.

Last week I took my 9 month old Galaxy S4 from my pocket. The screen had suddenly stopped working. It had been fine 3 hours earlier and in the meantime had been in my coat pocket, not tight trouser pockets or anything like that. It had not been dropped, leant on or in anyway been misused.

I contacted 3 my airtime provider and it was decided the phone would be sent to Samsung. Although I suspect it is not actually Samsung but a sub contractor. A couple of days later I got a text, fortuneately I have an old I phone I could put the SIM in. The repair was underway. The next day, a further text stating the phone was "deemed" out of warranty, the repair would cost £150 and call a number to confirm. I phoned and said I would not confirm and in the end the girl stated they were just a repair centre. Apparently the screen has a hairline crack which may not have been be visible to the naked eye. You may ask yourself, should this render the phone useless, a bit like your cosmetic damage.

I have since spoken to 3 and Samsung, 3 offered to pay £50 towards the repair which I rejected. They also continually repeat that the Samsung warranty does not cover damage. I in turn stated that the Sale of Goods Act states in terms that the phone must have a reasonable degree of durability, that the phone had a screen protector, which adheres to the screen and also was within a hard case. Therefore if it cannot withstand merely being in my pocket then it is probably not durable enough to pass the durability test. They again offered the £50 off and I again refused pointing out it is a matter of right or wrong not about the money.

If I had in any way mishandled the phone I would put it down to experience and pay up but I didn't so I will pay my £25 and go to the small claims court.

frugal_mike

Note that after 6 months any fault will be assumed to not be inherent unless proven otherwise. If you go to court you will have to prove (in the balance of probabilities, but not necessarily beyond reasonable doubt) that the crack is an inherent fault and not accidental damage.

DevCoder

andykom wrote: »

A situation not dissimilar to yours I'm afraid.

Last week I took my 9 month old Galaxy S4 from my pocket. The screen had suddenly stopped working. It had been fine 3 hours earlier and in the meantime had been in my coat pocket, not tight trouser pockets or anything like that. It had not been dropped, leant on or in anyway been misused.

I contacted 3 my airtime provider and it was decided the phone would be sent to Samsung. Although I suspect it is not actually Samsung but a sub contractor. A couple of days later I got a text, fortuneately I have an old I phone I could put the SIM in. The repair was underway. The next day, a further text stating the phone was "deemed" out of warranty, the repair would cost £150 and call a number to confirm. I phoned and said I would not confirm and in the end the girl stated they were just a repair centre. Apparently the screen has a hairline crack which may not have been be visible to the naked eye. You may ask yourself, should this render the phone useless, a bit like your cosmetic damage.

I have since spoken to 3 and Samsung, 3 offered to pay £50 towards the repair which I rejected. They also continually repeat that the Samsung warranty does not cover damage. I in turn stated that the Sale of Goods Act states in terms that the phone must have a reasonable degree of durability, that the phone had a screen protector, which adheres to the screen and also was within a hard case. Therefore if it cannot withstand merely being in my pocket then it is probably not durable enough to pass the durability test. They again offered the £50 off and I again refused pointing out it is a matter of right or wrong not about the money.

If I had in any way mishandled the phone I would put it down to experience and pay up but I didn't so I will pay my £25 and go to the small claims court.

A crack (no matter how small) in the screen is different to cosmetic crack in a case. If the crack goes through the digitizer (basically a phone screen has two layers, the glass and then the digitizer lcd) then this will obviously impact the working of the device.

Retrogamer

The crack is cosmetic, however it usually results due to it coming into contact with something hard enough to cause the crack.

I think if you go to court, Samsung will (if they bother to defend themself) claim that the impact that caused the crack, also caused the repair to fail prematurely.

andykom

Thank you all for the replies, I have issued a small claim this evening. frugal mike and retrogamer I was aware that after 6 months the inference is that it is not an inherent fault and of course that does not help my case. As you correctly state balance of probabilities is the burden, in the three hours between working fine and not working it had been in my coat pocket and was within a hard case and a screen protector. I maintain there was no impact and that any impact there may have been could not pass the requirement for durability test in the Sale of Goods Act. We will see what happens.

I could see no crack cosmetic or otherwise when I sent it in this is apparently on the report the girl at the service centre read out.

Also of course the action is against three, the retailer not Samsung the manufacturer.

sarah_b_2

my god, they have come up with a solution.
As a ''gesture of goodwill'' they are repairing my phone free of charge (I hate that term gesture of goodwill!) including the cosmetic crack. Its being done by Samsung themselves apparently.
This has come from the CEO's office. Every email I have replied to, I CC'd it to the CEO. I did it to be a pain in the bum tbh lol, but its got my issue resolved. Hubby is skeptical, but time will tell

sarah_b_2

I know it is frustrating and that you are banging your head against a brick wall when dealing with companies that wont listen. Good Luck

andykom wrote: »

Thank you all for the replies, I have issued a small claim this evening. frugal mike and retrogamer I was aware that after 6 months the inference is that it is not an inherent fault and of course that does not help my case. As you correctly state balance of probabilities is the burden, in the three hours between working fine and not working it had been in my coat pocket and was within a hard case and a screen protector. I maintain there was no impact and that any impact there may have been could not pass the requirement for durability test in the Sale of Goods Act. We will see what happens.

I could see no crack cosmetic or otherwise when I sent it in this is apparently on the report the girl at the service centre read out.

Also of course the action is against three, the retailer not Samsung the manufacturer.