Damaged goods in delivery

richardturn

Hi,

I need some advice, we bought a fridge freezer from currys, as we were awaiting a new kitchen we left it in the packaging.

When we have come to open it about 2 weeks later it has a dent in the fridge door, i rang up and complained and most i was offered was a 10% refund?

Should i not be expected a replacement fridge or was it my fault i didnt check? I didnt check as i was told we were protected with the extended warranty but on phone call it doesnt cover cosmetic damage.

thanks

JethroUK

richardturn wrote: »

Hi,

I need some advice, we bought a fridge freezer from currys, as we were awaiting a new kitchen we left it in the packaging.

When we have come to open it about 2 weeks later it has a dent in the fridge door, i rang up and complained and most i was offered was a 10% refund?

Should i not be expected a replacement fridge or was it my fault i didnt check? I didnt check as i was told we were protected with the extended warranty but on phone call it doesnt cover cosmetic damage.

thanks

Curry's are shocking to deal with and brazenly flout any laws/rights you may have so this is maybe not the right place for advice

Had Curry's sent a installer round and maliciously took a sledge hammer to your new fridge you would have not dissimilar problem

If you manage to get Curry's to comply with any consumer laws outside of court let me know and I'll give you my car

chickendipperbabe

Currys are not as bad as they used to be, certainly for out of warranty repairs they seem to give in pretty quickly as soon as they release your clued up on your rights. The 10% is the standard response if you find a scratch or dent, not that bad actually especially if it cant be seen. They should have offered a refund or replacement, their own returns policy states your entitled to either a refund or replacement upto 21 days if the item is faulty.

unholyangel

Sale of goods act gives you a reasonable time to inspect the goods to see whether they conform to contract.

If you reject the goods within a reasonable time, you can demand a full refund rather than a repair or replacement.

Once acceptance has occurred (once a reasonable time passes), that doesnt mean that you're stuck with faulty goods. It just means you can no longer demand a refund and may have to accept a repair or replacement.

Get back on to currys and ask for a replacement or refund since the goods didnt conform to contract upon delivery and see what they say.

autumnflower

It states on the website that you have 48hours to report damage from delivery... sometimes manufacturers will offer a replacement a bit longer than that (say about a week) but anything over will probably be only offered the 10% discount.

frugal_mike

What it states on the website about how long they give you to report delivery damage is irrelevant. The Sale of Goods Act gives you a reasonable time after delivery to inspect goods before acceptance occurs. Shops cannot deny you this right.

There is no definition of what a reasonable time is, but there is a very good chance it will be longer than 48 hours. I believe there is also upcoming legislation that will make 30 days the minimum reasonable time.

Hintza

frugal_mike wrote: »

I believe there is also upcoming legislation that will make 30 days the minimum reasonable time.

Why would anyone need 30 days to check that an item is damaged?

48 hours sounds more than reasonable.

frugal_mike

Hintza wrote: »

Why would anyone need 30 days to check that an item is damaged?

48 hours sounds more than reasonable.

48 hours may be enough for some types of damage in some situations, and it may be inadequate for other types of damage or other situations (especially damage that isn't apparent until the appliance is used).

Either way, my point was just that companies can't limit what is reasonable using their terms and conditions. They can ask you to notify them as soon as possible, or in a reasonable time etc. But before acceptance occurs the goods can be rejected. As for why 30 days is being picked, I have no idea. I'm not writing the legislation.

ThumbRemote

Hintza wrote: »

Why would anyone need 30 days to check that an item is damaged?

48 hours sounds more than reasonable.

You order a CD. It's delayed in the post so you have departed for a weeks holiday before it arrives. On returning home you find a jiffy bag containing a multi-piece CD-shaped jigsaw puzzle.

You buy a lawnmower. It's raining when you buy it so you wait for the next dry weekend day, which happens to be in a fortnights time. On the first use it becomes apparent that the blade isn't attached correctly so it won't cut.

Or plenty other scenarios where it may take a while to check.

Yet in each case you think the purchaser should be penalised for being sold faulty goods. How bizarre.

Hintza

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Yet in each case you think the purchaser should be penalised for being sold faulty goods. How bizarre.

The goods in this case are not faulty, they have been damaged in transit. The OP didn't take the 5 minutes necessary to check (and I have done the same especially when we built our new house).

There is a big difference between transit damage and faulty goods.

Your supercilious "How bizarre" was totally unnecessary! Poephol!

ThumbRemote

Hintza wrote: »

The goods in this case are not faulty, they have been damaged in transit. The OP didn't take the 5 minutes necessary to check (and I have done the same especially when we built our new house).

There is a big difference between transit damage and faulty goods.

Your supercilious "How bizarre" was totally unnecessary! Poephol!

Firstly I gave two scenarios, one of which was transit damage.

Secondly, there is no legal distinction between transit damage and faulty goods.

So your claim that "48 hours sounds more than reasonable" is indeed bizarre.