PC World / Nikon Camera Repair Issue

cheddar

I'll keep it to the facts, nice and simple:

11/11/14 - Bought a Nikon SLR camera for £279 from PC World

27/03/15 - LCD screen stopped working

03/04/15 - Took camera into PC World, staff member looked at it, tried the LCD, agreed it was faulty. Said they would send it off to Nikon to be repaired.

29/04/15 - See missed call on phone, assume it was PC World, go in. Told that Nikons sent a letter dated 20/04/15 saying upon inspection there is "evidence of physical damage to the case...this has invalidated the warranty and have estimated the unit for a repair...£125.83".

PC World staff member said we have 3 options:
- Pay for the repair
- Pay £15 minimum standard delivery to get the camera back
- Speak to Nikon ourselves.

All paperwork is between Nikon and Currys/Dixons.

I chose the latter but upon speaking to a couple of friends they are telling me it should be down to PC World to prove there is damage and it was caused by us. Also no one told us that we would be charged to get it back (although I assume this is in some small print somewhere).

I have sent an email to Nikon asking them to explain exactly what this damage is and for them to prove it was caused by us. I haven't had a reply yet but I've been told to expect to have the original letter repeated back at us.

Can someone advise me what we are to do in this situation? The camera never suffered any damage at our hands, it was always suitably stored, has never been dropped, bumped or otherwise knocked or damaged at all.

Thanks!

JJ_Egan

They don't have to prove damage was caused by you .
Nikon state it is damaged so its a question of what damage and does this damage show on photos you took of the product before it was sent off . Or likewise any other evidence that it was damaged or not before you sent it off .
PC World condition report on handover etc.

unholyangel

Are they saying the damage is responsible for the fault?

Or just that they wont repair the fault until the physical damage has been fixed?

cheddar

JJ_Egan wrote: »

They don't have to prove damage was caused by you .
Nikon state it is damaged so its a question of what damage and does this damage show on photos you took of the product before it was sent off . Or likewise any other evidence that it was damaged or not before you sent it off .
PC World condition report on handover etc.

Nope no damage before it was sent off whatsoever.

PC Worlds report says:

"Problem Description - NO DISPLAY ON LCD. ACCESSORIES ENCLOSED: BODY CAP ONLY"

No mention of condition whatsoever.

unholyangel wrote: »

Are they saying the damage is responsible for the fault?

Or just that they wont repair the fault until the physical damage has been fixed?

This is the letter:



They are saying we either pay for it to be fixed and returned or pay for it to be returned unfixed or they will keep/recycle it.

unholyangel

cheddar wrote: »

Nope no damage before it was sent off whatsoever.

PC Worlds report says:

"Problem Description - NO DISPLAY ON LCD. ACCESSORIES ENCLOSED: BODY CAP ONLY"

No mention of condition whatsoever.




This is the letter:



They are saying we either pay for it to be fixed and returned or pay for it to be returned unfixed or they will keep/recycle it.

The reason I asked is this.

Within 6 months from purchase, any fault is assumed to be inherent and it is for the retailer to prove otherwise. (after 6 months its for consumer to prove it was inherent).

A warranty repair is something separate to SoGA. If there is damage but its not responsible for the fault.....the retailer are still under an obligation to offer a repair, replacement or refund.

If they're saying the damage is responsible for the fault thats a bit trickier - although if you're sure it hasnt happened in your possession then i'd certainly argue the point with them that there was no damage noted when you handed it over.

If (for arguments sake) you had dropped it and this has caused the fault - there is no entitlement to a remedy under SoGA and (apparently in this case) no entitlement to a warranty repair either.

cheddar

unholyangel wrote: »

The reason I asked is this.

Within 6 months from purchase, any fault is assumed to be inherent and it is for the retailer to prove otherwise. (after 6 months its for consumer to prove it was inherent).

A warranty repair is something separate to SoGA. If there is damage but its not responsible for the fault.....the retailer are still under an obligation to offer a repair, replacement or refund.

If they're saying the damage is responsible for the fault thats a bit trickier - although if you're sure it hasnt happened in your possession then i'd certainly argue the point with them that there was no damage noted when you handed it over.

If (for arguments sake) you had dropped it and this has caused the fault - there is no entitlement to a remedy under SoGA and (apparently in this case) no entitlement to a warranty repair either.

Thanks, can you link me to some legal info on this, I thought the SoGA had been replaced with something else?

The bf (who uses the camera) has a good idea what's actually wrong with it and any case damage (again none happened whilst it was in our possession) wouldn't have caused this problem. But that's hypothesising anyway.

And sorry to the poster above I found another form from PC World which has a section asking to show damage on the product and a list of tick boxes saying:

As New
Good
Poor
Damaged

None of the boxes were ticked for some reason and yes it's my fault and yes I should have noticed it. Also on the form it mentions that the Service Terms of the repair is provided by Dixons and there's no mention of having to pay to get the item back.

wealdroam

cheddar wrote: »

Thanks, can you link me to some legal info on this, I thought the SoGA had been replaced with something else?

The Sale of Goods Act certainly has not been replaced.

Part 5A covers the additional rights of consumers.

If you are looking for something a bit easier to read, try MSE's Consumer Rights guide, where you will find:

When goods are faulty, if you return them within six months, then it's up to the shop to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After this, the burden of proof shifts and it's up to you to prove they were faulty when you bought them.

unholyangel

cheddar wrote: »

Thanks, can you link me to some legal info on this, I thought the SoGA had been replaced with something else?

The bf (who uses the camera) has a good idea what's actually wrong with it and any case damage (again none happened whilst it was in our possession) wouldn't have caused this problem. But that's hypothesising anyway.

And sorry to the poster above I found another form from PC World which has a section asking to show damage on the product and a list of tick boxes saying:

As New
Good
Poor
Damaged

None of the boxes were ticked for some reason and yes it's my fault and yes I should have noticed it. Also on the form it mentions that the Service Terms of the repair is provided by Dixons and there's no mention of having to pay to get the item back.

Theres MSE's guide to consumer rights here:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange?_ga=1.162326588.1086820283.1430405377

Or if you want the actual legislation itself, you can find that here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54

It is being replaced (in october later this year) but I think what you're thinking of is the DSRs being replaced with the CCRs (which happened last year in june). The SoGA is very much still current legislation.

As for the form, I presume thats a form for them to fill in rather than the consumer?

cheddar

Thanks both this is very helpful to me!

The form is a Service Docket. I have my copy of it, they have theirs and I assume one was sent off with the camera.

It has my details, product details, info on any damage, fault details and then the terms. Yup PC World filled it in.

wealdroam

Cheddar, how did you pay for this camera?
Did you use credit, maybe a credit card?

I ask because the credit provider may be equally responsible for performance of the sale contract. This means that you can seek a remedy under SoGA from either the credit provider or PCW.

cheddar

wealdroam wrote: »

Cheddar, how did you pay for this camera?
Did you use credit, maybe a credit card?

I ask because the credit provider may be equally responsible for performance of the sale contract. This means that you can seek a remedy under SoGA from either the credit provider or PCW.

I used a Visa debit card.