TV under 2 years develops fault- my rights?

chickalittle

Hi -Hoping someone can give me words of advice!
I have a Samsung Plasma TV purchase June 30 2013 from Curry's for £729 so just under 2 years old. Last week a green vertical line appeared from top to bottom of the screen affecting the quality when watching it. Looking on -line it appears to be a fairly common fault from what I can see.

I have been back in touch with Curry's asking as it is less than 2 years old will they repair or replace. They have responded they will collect and inspect it in their workshop for a charge of £95 and if it is found to have a manufacturing fault they will repair free of charge and refund the assessment fee.

Can I argue against the charge given the EU directive states all goods come with a 2 year guarantee? I am concerned that a) they could really say whatever they want regards the TV fault as they are assessing it and b) I may be left without a TV for ages whilst they assess it.
Does anyone have any experience of a situation like this? Are the odds that Curry's will repair or would I be better obtaining an independent engineer assessment? If so does it need to be anyone special or can I simply get a TV engineer to inspect and prepare a report?
Many thanks for any pointers.

wealdroam

chickalittle wrote: »

... the EU directive states all goods come with a 2 year guarantee?

Does it?

An EU directive actually instructs all EU member states to incorporate things into their legislation.

The particular directive you speak about instructs states to allow consumers to seek a remedy for up to two years. It does not offer a two year guarantee as we know it.

The UK's Sale of Goods Act allows consumers to seek a remedy for up to six years.

As your tv is over six months old, the seller can insist on you proving that the thing is inherently faulty.
Currys are offering to do that checking for you for £95.

The choice is yours... either get your own report confirming the inherent fault, or let Currys do it.

JJ_Egan

As above yet to see this supposed law many bang on about .


Ask your local independent TV engineer ( if any still trading ) how much for a full report .

chickendipperbabe

This will almost certainly be classed as a manufacturing defect. Pay the £95 - its their standard charge for out of warranty repair/inspection and this is fully refundable once they deem it to be a manufacturing defect. Currys are quite easy to deal with when it comes to things like this.

You could go down the independent route but its hard to find one that will asses without carrying out the work but if you do, Currys might not accept their report if its too vague, incomplete or not on proper headed paper, I think they also require a VAT number for some reason.

chickalittle

Thanks for the responses.

Wealdroam - the directive states "A two-year guarantee applies for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the EU. In some countries, this may be more, and some manufacturers also choose to offer a longer warranty period."

Have I misinterpreted this?

But given the other replies I will pay the £95 inspection fee Curry's charge and see what they come back with. Looking on line it seems to be a fairly common propblem occuring around the 2 year mark with these TV's. At £729 I would expect better than this.

Thanks

wealdroam

chickalittle wrote: »

Wealdroam - the directive states "A two-year guarantee applies for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the EU. In some countries, this may be more, and some manufacturers also choose to offer a longer warranty period."

Have I misinterpreted this?

You decide.

Here is an extract from a House of Commons Library document which tries to explain:

Under this Directive [Directive 1999/44/EC], all Member States have to ensure that “a retailer could be held liable for all 'non-conformities' (i.e. defects) which manifest in the good within two years from delivery”. However, this requirement is not a two-year legal guarantee (although, rather confusingly, the Directive’s title describes it as such); goods are not legally required to last for two years. It simply provides that consumer goods must conform to the sales contract at the time of delivery. If a consumer can show that the goods did not do so, they will be entitled to repair or replacement of the goods free of charge. If this would be disproportionate or unreasonable to expect from the retailer, the consumer will be entitled to a reduction in price or a refund. These consumer rights are available for up to two years following purchase.

That document goes on to say:

However, as mentioned above, the Directive adds little to UK consumer protection law. The SGA1979 already provides the same legal rights to consumers to return faulty goods but for a period of up to six years after purchase - a much longer period therefore than provided for by the EU Directive. As a result, consumers should still rely on the SGA 1979 when returning faulty goods.

As you can see, The Sale of Goods Act (aka SGA 1979 in that document) offers the better deal.

chickalittle

I see what you are saying - it is all very ambigous...

I hadn't read too deeply into the EU directive but my interpration was that in the UK whilst the sales of goods act covers up to 6 years from purchase after 6 months the burdon of proof rests with the purchaser to show there is an inherent manufacturing fault. But under the EU directive I would be covered for 2 years under the guarantee without having to provide that proof. That's why I thought the EU directive might be the better choice to fight my corner with in this situation......

bod1467

Sale of Goods Act trumps the EU directive, so you can't pick and choose. One is law, the other merely a request to implement the minimum requirements of the directive into local law. (Which SoGA already does).

unholyangel

chickalittle wrote: »

I see what you are saying - it is all very ambigous...

I hadn't read too deeply into the EU directive but my interpration was that in the UK whilst the sales of goods act covers up to 6 years from purchase after 6 months the burdon of proof rests with the purchaser to show there is an inherent manufacturing fault. But under the EU directive I would be covered for 2 years under the guarantee without having to provide that proof. That's why I thought the EU directive might be the better choice to fight my corner with in this situation......

The 6 month burden exists in UK law because of that EU directive.

You can read the directive here:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:31999L0044

The parts particularly mentioned in this thread are:

(17) Whereas it is appropriate to limit in time the period during which the seller is liable for any lack of conformity which exists at the time of delivery of the goods; whereas Member States may also provide for a limitation on the period during which consumers can exercise their rights, provided such a period does not expire within two years from the time of delivery; whereas where, under national legislation, the time when a limitation period starts is not the time of delivery of the goods, the total duration of the limitation period provided for by national law may not be shorter than two years from the time of delivery;

And:

3. Unless proved otherwise, any lack of conformity which becomes apparent within six months of delivery of the goods shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery unless this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

As you can see, it is the EU directive that set the rule that only goods faulty in the first six months are assumed to be inherent. After that there is no assumption and it is up to you to prove that they were inherently faulty.

chickalittle

I didn't want to start a new thread! I ended up going with an independent report in the end which states the TV is beyond repair as the part is no longer supplied by Samsung.

I'm waiting to hear back from Curry's now on the back of the report but want to know what the options are as they can't repair it. Are they likely to offer me a credit note and how is this normally calculated? (I'm assuming it would not be the full purchase amount as I have had nearly 2 years viewing without issue). Can I ask for a cash refund or do I have to accept a credit note? And should I be prepared to negotiate. If anyone has any ideas how these settlements are calculated I would be grateful.

Thanks,

JJ_Egan

Beyond repair does not mean its an inherent fault or that the vendor is responsible .Does the report not state the actual problem and reason why it failed .