Faulty Xmas Lights - Burnt Sofa!

baza52

nothing to lose by contacting head office.
They may be part of a faulty batch that they already know about from other complaints.

hollydays

Found this thread it may nor may not be of use
http://www.theiet.org/forums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=205&threadid=54364

hollydays

My own experience of B & M Stores customer service was not great.

unholyangel

Just to note to those saying can't prove they were purchased etc, they wouldn't just have recourse with the retailer in this instance, (but they'd only need proof of purchase if the retailer disputes there is a contractual obligation - theres nothing in law requiring proof of purchase).

When a product causes damage to other property or injury/death, the manufacturer can also be liable to anyone harmed by the products, not just those who purchase them.

However I believe there is a lower limit of £275 on property damage claims (no limit on personal injury afaik) so not sure if that would be over this or not.

Of course I still think its entirely possible that there will be a disclaimer/warning saying not to have the lights on upholstered areas or words to that effect.

wealdroam

unholyangel wrote: »

Just to note to those saying can't prove they were purchased etc, they wouldn't just have recourse with the retailer in this instance, (but they'd only need proof of purchase if the retailer disputes there is a contractual obligation - theres nothing in law requiring proof of purchase).

When a product causes damage to other property or injury/death, the manufacturer can also be liable to anyone harmed by the products, not just those who purchase them.

However I believe there is a lower limit of £275 on property damage claims (no limit on personal injury afaik) so not sure if that would be over this or not.

Of course I still think its entirely possible that there will be a disclaimer/warning saying not to have the lights on upholstered areas or words to that effect.

OK, then re-reading the original post again, it looks as though B&M have acknowledged their contractual obligation by offering a refund.

As the seller was 'pretty unhelpful', we can probably conclude that the OP's parents are unlikely to receive compensation for their consequential loss without proving that the damage was caused by an inherent fault.

Perhaps the OP's parents should get in touch with B&M's head office - as suggested by the in store staff if they wish to progress this further.

George_Michael

unholyangel wrote: »

When a product causes damage to other property or injury/death, the manufacturer can also be liable to anyone harmed by the products, not just those who purchase them.

The biggest problem with this is that I would almost guarantee that the lights in question were manufactured by a company based in China, Vietnam, Taiwan or somewhere similar so even if they are liable for any damage, actually getting anything out of them may well be next to impossible.

unholyangel

George_Michael wrote: »

The biggest problem with this is that I would almost guarantee that the lights in question were manufactured by a company based in China, Vietnam, Taiwan or somewhere similar so even if they are liable for any damage, actually getting anything out of them may well be next to impossible.

Then the importer would be liable.

George_Michael

unholyangel wrote: »

Then the importer would be liable.

I disagree.

The importer could be liable but only if the manufacturer couldn't be determined.
Just because it might be hard to actually take action against the manufacturer because of their location doesn't automatically mean that the next company in the supply chain takes up the responsibility.

unholyangel

George_Michael wrote: »

I disagree.

The importer could be liable but only if the manufacturer couldn't be determined.
Just because it might be hard to actually take action against the manufacturer because of their location doesn't automatically mean that the next company in the supply chain takes up the responsibility.

The legislation itself says the importer is liable unless the manufacturer is established in a member state. Not sure where you're getting the manufacturer not being determined part:

“producer” means—
(a) the manufacturer of a product, when he is established in a Member State and any other
person presenting himself as the manufacturer by affixing to the product his name, trade
mark or other distinctive mark, or the person who reconditions the product;
(b) when the manufacturer is not established in a Member State—
(i) if he has a representative established in a Member State, the representative,
(ii) in any other case, the importer of the product from a state that is not a Member State
into a Member State;

paddyrg

Talk to head office - what's to lose?