Curry's insiting engineer visit chargeable to confirm fault on new cooker

hollydays

What I'm getting at is that if the paint is only flaking on areas of use that have possibly been cleaned by harsh abrasives eg the top or where the top joins the sides( and it's looking like that is the case here ie the top or near the top at the sides) then they may suspect the damage has been caused by the user.
In their view it may be easy for the consumer afterwards claim they cleaned by the recommended methods, but they may not have.

naedanger

vtc6 wrote: »

Sorry guys just to be clear, Curry's want *me* to book an Indesit engineer or that they will book it on my behalf. My issue is that by booking in the Indesit call out I am unnecessarily entering into a new agreement with Indesit for the call out, and opening myself to Indesit's charge if the flaking paint is not covered by Indesit warranty.

Your concern is completely valid. You will have a contract with Indesit, and have to pay them regardless of what happens with Currys. Currys are basically saying you need to prove the item was faulty. This is not generally the legal position as you bought the item within the previous 6 months. (The only circumstance where I would suggest you get the item tested, and then by someone independent, is if you think the fault could naturally look like user damage but you believe an expert would decide otherwise.) If a layman would be either unlikely to have a firm view of the cause or believe it was inherently faulty then don't bother with the test.

In fairness Curry's are just doing what anyone would do, trying to get this sorted under warranty direct with Indesit, so they don't have to deal with it.

Agreed. They could just say we don't agree. Sue us if you disagree. Or they could just ignore you. What they are doing is offering another option to resolve the matter. However as that option involves you getting an engineer's test that you don't believe is necessary then it is perfectly reasonable for you to decline this alternative route.

In terms of court fees and loss of earnings etc, it is unlikely to come to that. In my experience once Curry's receive court paperwork the issue gets escalated to a more intelligent member of Curry's staff who will immediately resolve the matter. Or Curry's legal team will advise Curry's that they do in fact need to arrange their own engineer and they can't force me to book a potentially chargeable Indesit callout.

Agreed up to a point. Some large companies just can't be that bothered and assume only a very small proportion of those threatening court action will follow through. (What I am confident about is that a court will not take a negative view of your refusal to pay for a tester.)

naedanger

vtc6 wrote: »

Also I just don't see how Curry's could be so silly as to even let this go to court.

I would certainly not be certain of this point. Although if they do let it go to court it would not surprise me if they don't put any effort in to defend it. Also in my view you should always consider what is likely to happen if it does get to court.

If you guys advise it, I will even explicitly write in my final letter that I accept to pay reasonable costs if my claim is false.

I wouldn't say that? Are you also taking on a contingent liability for their legal costs? If you are not legally liable for their costs if you lose why do you want to take on this liability. If you think all you are doing is saying you will pay what you are legally required to pay then it seems like a redundant thing to say. Like saying you will abide by the court decision.

I have chronological photos to show an immaculate and virtually new cooker with a serious progressive fault. What will Curry's have? They will have a letter saying I declined to telephone some third party (Indesit) to book an engineer who's probably going to bill me for the call out.

Agreed. Obviously it is essential you would be charged (at least in some circumstances). If it was a no fee inspection you were refusing you would be being unreasonable and the court would consider that point relevant.

I'm assuming Curry's have a legal team who will look at the court paperwork before they allow it to go further.

As I said, I would not be surprised if it gets to court but Currys put very little effort in to defending the case. This might be cheaper than paying for a legal team to look at minor (to them) disputes.

vtc6

Guys thanks for all the advise so far, it's been good to learn how these things work as well.

I've stated a clear and firm case to Curry's using your advice, hopefully they will come back with a resolution and I'll post back here.

vtc6

Just to give some feedback as people were so helpful and might want to know how this turned out. In the end Currys appeared to just be ignoring emails. I sent a final statement and asked that they resolve within two weeks. They didn't and after such a long silence I uncomfortably decided to make a claim through MCOL.

At roughly the same time a more senior Curry's representative finally contacted me and said she could "look" at putting it in writing that they would cover Indesit's charge if the fault wasn't covered by warranty but also wasn't due to my misuse. But she did also say that if I've made the MCOL claim then customer services can no longer help me. I told her that I have already made the claim as their deadline had way passed.

Curry's did not respond to the MCOL claim. Maybe because it was Christmas and staff were busy or their department was closed. I requested judgement and that was issued.

Now to see if Curry's will pay up or if I need to enforce judgement.