Your thoughts please would be appreciated

judy2357

December just before Xmas

My elderly father who is 85 years old and almost blind purchased a Panasonic tv from the Panasonic Shop for almost £2000. He particularly wanted this tv because it reads out the menus to him and also the list of any programmes recorded. The salesman said it came with 5/6 years warranty (cant remember which) and a free iPad so obviously this persuaded him to purchase it, they explained that he needed to go online to claim the ipad as it was a promotion.

Anyway when the tv arrived I had to photograph the barcode on the box and the receipt and upload it to their website to claim the ipad. I did this on my phone because I had taken the pics on the phone and not being too technical was not sure how to get the pics onto my parents laptop, have since realised I could have emailed them to myself.

Jan 17th My dad received a letter saying that one of the pics was blurred so after attempting to ring them several times I eventually got through to someone who said to email them the pics, which I did again whilst on the phone. The lady said they had been verified but now they had run out of ipads, she also said she would email my parents yesterday to confirm what they would be offered instead. Of course no email arrived so I had to ring them again today and eventually they have made their offer, a 19" tv, or a soundbar, or a wireless speaker or a tv recorder. I told them my dad did not need any of these and they offer £200 Lovetoshop vouchers which would be at least £100 if not £200 less than the value of the ipad.

The people at Panasonic promotions kept referring me to their terms and conditions which apparently were on their website when I upload the pics. There was no mention of terms and conditions when the salesman was selling this tv to my dad.

I havent replied as yet but would be grateful for your thoughts, as my dad was really looking forward to receiving the ipad. Thanks in advance.

cattie

There are always terms & conditions with any offer & you need to read them to see what your father's rights are.

arcon5

He's bound by the shops terms though. If they have no terms relating to substitutions then have them deal with it

Poppie68

Usually the T&C state with offers like this, the offer is only available while stocks last.

jacques_chirac

There is normally a while stocks last/ replacement may be offered clause in these offers, perhaps you could ask them to send you a copy to be sure? The reason you are being offered less in vouchers is because the cost to the retailer of vouchers is a fair bit higher than the cost of an ipad or other physical goods.

judy2357

Here is the page with the terms and conditions http://promotions.panasonic.co.uk/offer/dt65-smart-viera-tv-ipad-in-independents-only/ and it does say " This is a limited offer, whilst stocks last. In the event of stock no longer being available, those customers with valid claims will be informed in writing." I admit I didnt study these when claiming as I had to claim on my mobile and just clicked through to the uploading bit.

However there was no mention of this in the shop and no mention of the receipt. I think my dad would be happy if they supplied vouchers to the value of the ipad but I dont think you would get an ipad for £200, should it not have been like for like.

judy2357

It is also very annoying that if they had informed us earlier that one of the pics was blurred, it would have been verified earlier and perhaps they wouldnt have run out of ipads.

arcon5

Was their any terms available when he purchased it? What's on their website is not relevant - he didn't buy of the website, he bought in store - that's where their terms should have been made available.

I'd also argue 'whilst stocks last' would be an unfair term, especially in this instance where the offer is significant in influencing the buyers buying decision.
An 'alternative may be offered' type term may be okay - if like for like I suppose.

Although personally i'd be kicking up such a fuss right now with the shop.

unholyangel

Hmmm maybe not.

Schedule 2, paragraph 1, states that terms may be unfair if they have the object or effect of:
(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract.

...However, terms of whose existence and content the consumer has no adequate notice at the time of entering the contract may not be binding under the general law, in any case, especially if they are onerous in character.

Unless perhaps the buyer was given a leaflet or the terms and conditions were available in store.

judy2357

arcon5 wrote: »

Was their any terms available when he purchased it? What's on their website is not relevant - he didn't buy of the website, he bought in store - that's where their terms should have been made available.

I'd also argue 'whilst stocks last' would be an unfair term, especially in this instance where the offer is significant in influencing the buyers buying decision.
An 'alternative may be offered' type term may be okay - if like for like I suppose.

Although personally i'd be kicking up such a fuss right now with the shop.

Thank you I will need to reply to either accept or refuse one of their offers, but will sleep on it and discuss again with my parents tomorrow. I am tempted to reply and not accept as then Panasonic Promotions will go back to Panasonic and report that my dad is not happy and hopefully they will come back with an improved offer.

I will have to read through all the documents re the t&c but they were definitely not mentioned on purchase. To be honest they would be upsetting a very good and loyal customer as several of my parents' electrical goods are Panasonic. Thanks once again.

judy2357

unholyangel wrote: »

Hmmm maybe not.



Unless perhaps the buyer was given a leaflet or the terms and conditions were available in store.

As mentioned before my dad is almost blind, carries a white stick so would have needed the t&c read out to him. The salesman knew this as it was explained to him that this is why he needed the reading function.