Where do I stand with currys?

girlycara

Apologies this is long winded, will try and paraphrase as much as I can

Bought a underwater camera from currys at end of July, can go up,to 8m down. Used on holiday to max depth of 1.5m,,camera leaked and lens condensed etc. definitely used correctly no,question about that. This was abroad in mid August. I bought a replacement camera locally, only one available at equivalent of £173.

I,bought the camera specifically for this holiday, to use in the pool. It had no other use or purpose for me, so not sure if that makes a difference. I've written to currys asking for a refund on the camera and reimbursement of £173, and stated the camera I bought abroad would be returned to them as it would be their property.

They are flatly refusing to reimburse the replacement, and only offering a repair on the original,purchase.

Can anyone help?

tomtontom

Given the length of time since purchase it could be reasonably argued acceptance has occurred. After this point the retailer is required to offer you (at their choice) a repair, replacement or proportionate refund. They have done this.

Why you think they should refund you for the new csmera I have no idea. Think about it, if the camera had not been faulty you wouldn't be looking to return it after your trip!

shaun_from_Africa

You might have a chance to get a refund of the original purchase if you are able to convince someone from Currys that the camera was faulty when purchased and you only discovered this when it was first used.
The Sale of goods act gives you the right to reject faulty goods if the fault is discovered within a reasonable time from purchase.
You are not deemed to have accepted the goods until you have had a chance to inspect and test them to ensure that they are as described and fit for the purpose for which they were sold.

If acceptance has occurred, they are entitled to opt to repair the camera.
You can ask for a refund but they are within their rights to reject this request if they think a repair or replacement is more cost effective for them.

Currys have no legal obligations whatsoever to refund you for the overseas purchase.

bris

You seriously expect them to refund you for the new camera you bought?

boliston

Can't see what the third party camera has to do with currys - their duty is to "remedy" the problem with the item they supplied.

foxtrotoscar_2

You've offered to sell them a second hand camera and they've refused...move on !

LilElvis

How can you reasonably expect Currys to refund you both the cost of the camera you purchased from them and the one you purchased abroad? Baffled by your logic.

unholyangel

LilElvis wrote: »

How can you reasonably expect Currys to refund you both the cost of the camera you purchased from them and the one you purchased abroad? Baffled by your logic.

Seems to have been a reoccurring theme on threads this week.


OP, sorry....but you are being unrealistic with your expectations. It would be astounding of currys to give you what you're asking and sometimes companies do go far above and far beyond what they have to. We can't really tell you how to make currys give you what you want, we can only really advise on what you might be entitled to (and I say might because we could be absolutely anybody so should not be taken as official legal advice).

In a breach of contract claim, you are entitled to reasonable losses incurred as a direct result of the breach. However, you do have a statutory duty to mitigate your losses. Personally, I dont think you've done that in this case. I don't see £173 to take pictures underwater in a pool as reasonable. If it had been a trip specifically to go scuba diving then perhaps i'd feel differently.

Also, I don't think you mentioned the price of the other camera. If it was significantly less than the newer one, I can quite understand why they're not even offering goodwill.

The only possible "better" result would be arguing non-acceptance as mentioned in earlier posts which would at least give you a refund on the original one.

stugib

girlycara wrote: »

I,bought the camera specifically for this holiday, to use in the pool. It had no other use or purpose for me, so not sure if that makes a difference. I've written to currys asking for a refund on the camera and reimbursement of £173, and stated the camera I bought abroad would be returned to them as it would be their property.

So by that logic, if the original camera had worked perfectly you'd have expected to be able to return it to Currys for a refund because you only needed it for that holiday!

prowla

Seems to me that the original camera was faulty, and the evidence is that you bought another one.

They could query why it's taken this long to claim that it is defective, but (IMHO) you should be entitled to a refund, since the warranty against defects and design should be at least a year.

The replacement camera bought is none of Currys business, and I wouldn't expect them to reimburse for that.

marliepanda

prowla wrote: »

Seems to me that the original camera was faulty, and the evidence is that you bought another one.

They could query why it's taken this long to claim that it is defective, but (IMHO) you should be entitled to a refund, since the warranty against defects and design should be at least a year.

The replacement camera bought is none of Currys business, and I wouldn't expect them to reimburse for that.

Replacing an item isn't proof it is faulty. The op could have damaged it for all currys know.

Currys are repairing it. Why are you falsely saying the op is entitled to a refund and the warranty should be a year. A warranty isn't a given, and even then you would be bound by the terms of the warranty if you chose to pursue that instead of the soga, and the vast majority of warranties are for repair or replacement, not a refund.