Samsung Mini Phone - Rights!

arsenalboy

Buzby wrote: »

Samsung would not care either way. In addition to no precedent, they have the weight of numbers of global sales to support their contention there is no inferential fault.

As they would not be the person sued, the protection is complete.

They might not be the person sued, but is protection complete if their reputation is tarnished?

stebiz

I really can't understand those who believe that a cracked screen phone on the phone which has not been dropped, stood on, in a back pocket is the fault of the consumer.

I have got two phones as I suggested and both of which are less than 6 months old and hence the onus is on the retailer to prove that I am at fault.

The phone is the Samsung S3 Mini but it appears that the screen is similar in design to other S3's. The principal is the same though 'it is not fit for purpose' and if you stand your ground you will get a refund.

As it stands I want a refund for my one which is less than 28 days old as that is what I'm entitled too. I'm only entitled to a repair on my 'less than 6 months old'.

I've spoken to a mobile repair shop and after having shown them the phone have agreed to do a report. The catalogue company appear at this stage agreeable to reimburse on one and repair the other if I provide a report - and also pay the cost of a report.

If they don't it will either be the FOS or Small Claims Court against the retailer but also a letter prior to Samsung advising them of the actions I am going to take and the negative publicity it will give.

http://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/your-refund-rights-cracked-screen-samsung-galaxy-s3/