Received damaged Goods. Currys refusing to replace item. HELP!!

gingdave

Hi,
I received a damaged Zanussi fridge/freezer from Currys (approx 26th Oct 2013). Significant dent to side of item, near the bottom next to the motor. Unpacked and installed into fitted kitchen by delivery men. Damage only noticed 4 weeks later when the fridge/freezer was slid out due to an electrician needing to access the wall behind it. The item had not been moved prior to this since installation. Zanussi assigned an engineer to inspect the item due to an ill fitting salad drawer and commented that the dent looked as though the item "had been dropped". Currys have offered a 10% good will gesture but refuse to replace the item with a new unit as they state that I should have informed them of the damage within 48 hours of receiving it, but they do not dispute that the item was received in a damaged state. I personally feel that the item has been devalued by at least 75%, not to mention my warranty also being in doubt seeing as Zanussi have decided to blame the dent for causing the other problem. As the dent is next to the motor etc I feel that should the item fail the dent will again be blamed and both Zanussi and Currys will refuse to help. I am not looking for a financial 'good will gesture', I just want a new unit that is in perfect condition, the condition that any paying customer would expect. I was wondering where I stand re the Sales of Goods Act 1979 as it seems that Currys are not in a position to state that I must report any damage within 48 hours (their interpretation of a reasonable period of time), especially if the damage is not in an obvious place and causes the item to not fulfill the criteria of being 'as described' or 'of satisfactory quality', not mention the fact that the damage is next to the motor and the need for a fridge/freezer to be correctly sealed could class the item as being questionably 'fit for purpose'. Currys are currently standing firm on this despite numerous emails.
Any guidance on this would be gratefully received.

bris

Bit late now, can you blame them, although 48 hours is unreasonable 4 weeks isnt, take the 10%.

mattyprice4004

75%? Come off it. Tell me where I can get a £400 freezer for £100 because it's dented, I'm all ears!

wealdroam

OP, it might be worth you reading this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4862504

gingdave

Thanks for the replies. Just received this from CAB....

We understand from your email that a fridge
freezer has been delivered damaged and you
want to know your rights. Based on the
information you have provided the key points in
response to your enquiry are as follows:
Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (As
Amended) all goods supplied by a trader to a
consumer must be of a satisfactory quality, fit
for their purpose, and as described. If the
goods do not meet these requirements, then
you may have a short time in which to return
the goods to the trader and ask for a refund.
After this your rights will be to claim:
- a repair or a like-for-like replacement; or if
neither of these are possible -
- an appropriate level of refund (this may take
into account usage).
If you wish to pursue a refund, the trader may
ask you to prove the faults are due to the
manufacture of the goods, rather than fair
wear & tear, misuse, accidental damage or
neglect.
Alternatively, if you will allow the trader a
chance to repair or replace before considering a
refund then this ‘burden of proof’ works the
other way - any faults which occur within the
first 6 months are assumed to have been
present at the time of sale, and have only just
become apparent. If the trader believes
otherwise (for instance, if they believe you have
caused the fault through misuse) they have the
right to test the product to prove their case. If
they cannot prove their case, you may seek a
suitable form of redress as detailed above.
At this stage we would advise to discuss the
matter further with the trader, referring to the
information above, as it is always advisable to
try to negotiate an outcome that is acceptable
to yourself and the trader before taking any
further steps. If this does not resolve the
matter, you could take a more formal approach
and write to the trader. The letter should
outline any relevant events regarding this issue
and make it clear what you expect from the
trader and why. It should also give the trader
a reasonable time to resolve the matter.
Template letters can be found at (if the link does not
work when you click it, please copy and paste it
into your browser address bar). In this case,
the letter named ‘Letter to complain about
faulty goods’ would be most suitable. If you use
the template letter then please amend it as to
fit your circumstances.
We would also suggest that any letter is sent by
recorded delivery and that you keep a copy –
this may help you prove that you have
contacted the trader and tried to resolve the
matter amicably, and also you can use the
‘Recorded Signed For’ label the post office will
supply you with to confirm that the trader has
received the letter.
In addition, if you have paid by credit or debit
card, you may be able to seek a refund through
the card issuer if they have a 'chargeback'
scheme. You should submit your claim in
writing to the bank, specifically mentioning the
'chargeback' scheme, and asking that the
matter is resolved in a timely manner.
Please can you also provide the trader’s
address and postcode so we can add these to
the case notes?
If you require any further advice or information
about this case, please do not hesitate to
contact the Citizens Advice consumer service by
return email or by calling 08454 04 05 06
quoting the case reference number.
Thank you for your enquiry.
Rhys
Citizens Advice consumer service
Tel: 08454 04 05 06

gingdave

Also a lot of helpful replies on the consumeractiongroup forum under the same thread title. Looks like I'm in for a long fight.

McKneff

Once it is pushed back in, it wont be noticeable, surely, take the 10% job done and you ca
n get on with your life.

Esqui

Bear in mind that although the burden of proof is on them, they will be able to show that you have signed for the item as checked (unless you specifically wrote otherwise).

bod1467

Esqui wrote: »

Bear in mind that although the burden of proof is on them, they will be able to show that you have signed for the item as checked (unless you specifically wrote otherwise).

That's an unfair term and wouldn't stand up in court. (I believe this has already been tested ... when signing for a delivery you are signing ONLY for the delivery, irrespective of what the form/handheld device says on it).

Fosterdog

bod1467 wrote: »

That's an unfair term and wouldn't stand up in court. (I believe this has already been tested ... when signing for a delivery you are signing ONLY for the delivery, irrespective of what the form/handheld device says on it).

This wasn't a basic delivery though with an item still sealed/in packaging. The item was opened and installed in the home giving ample opportunity to check it. OP has already said they just "left them to it" while the install was being done.

unholyangel

Fosterdog wrote: »

This wasn't a basic delivery though with an item still sealed/in packaging. The item was opened and installed in the home giving ample opportunity to check it. OP has already said they just "left them to it" while the install was being done.

Personally I would say that's reasonable. To expect that the delivery men (especially if they were paid to install it) would carry out their duties with reasonable care and skill.

Remember, SoGA gives you a reasonable time to inspect the goods to see if they conform to contract. Given they were changing the SoGA so you would have a minimum of 30 days to reject any item for a full refund....4 weeks is definitely not unreasonable imo.

Especially given that's whats a reasonable time takes into account circumstances. The circumstances being delivery men installed it unsupervised and OP only discovered it under the circumstances they described in OP.