Section 75 claim or not on Sony tv.

Mik77

Hi, In November 2015, I bought a Sony Android tv, from Richer Sounds, (chose Richer Sounds as they offer a 6 year warranty). The TV was purchased in full with credit card and bought in store.

Since having the TV it seemed to have a fault, which would result in it being unresponsive to remote or button pressing on TV unit, no sound but picture, picture freezing. This only remedies itself by turning the power off to the TV and switching back on again.

I reported the fault with Richer Sounds in March, however was advised I need to go direct to SONY given that the TV is still within 12 month warranty. Since reporting to Sony, I have had telephone correspondence, mainly prompted by me, and have received various instructions via email, none of which have solved the problem with the TV. I have requested on various occasions a replacement unit to be sent out, but this has been refused, instead offering a repair service, only when Sony are satisfied that I have tried all the ‘work arounds’.

I was speaking to someone at work about the problem today, and they pointed out that due to being bought on a credit card the tv would be covered for a replacement or refund. Which brought me to this website.

I’m inclined to go straight to the credit card company and raise it as a claim, but not sure whether I should go back to Sony and request a replacement tv first.

This is the first time I have been aware of Section 75, and although it is probably straight forward, I’m hoping for someone to give a little advice.

Thanks, in advance.

wealdroam

Mik77 wrote: »

Hi, In November 2015, I bought a Sony Android tv, from Richer Sounds, (chose Richer Sounds as they offer a 6 year warranty). The TV was purchased in full with credit card and bought in store.

Since having the TV it seemed to have a fault, which would result in it being unresponsive to remote or button pressing on TV unit, no sound but picture, picture freezing. This only remedies itself by turning the power off to the TV and switching back on again.

I reported the fault with Richer Sounds in March, however was advised I need to go direct to SONY given that the TV is still within 12 month warranty. Since reporting to Sony, I have had telephone correspondence, mainly prompted by me, and have received various instructions via email, none of which have solved the problem with the TV. I have requested on various occasions a replacement unit to be sent out, but this has been refused, instead offering a repair service, only when Sony are satisfied that I have tried all the ‘work arounds’.

I was speaking to someone at work about the problem today, and they pointed out that due to being bought on a credit card the tv would be covered for a replacement or refund. Which brought me to this website.

I’m inclined to go straight to the credit card company and raise it as a claim, but not sure whether I should go back to Sony and request a replacement tv first.

This is the first time I have been aware of Section 75, and although it is probably straight forward, I’m hoping for someone to give a little advice.

Thanks, in advance.

Firstly, you are entitled to seek a remedy from the seller for up to six years from the date of the sale.
This short extract from MSE's Consumer Rights guide may help you:

Know who's responsible

When returning items, beware shops trying the oldest trick in the book: saying they're not responsible for the shoddy goods and you must call the manufacturer. This is total nonsense!

If a company fobs you off by saying “go to the maker instead”, it's wrong. It's the retailer's job to sort it.

It doesn't matter if it's an iPod from a high street shop or a designer frock from a department store. If something's broken, torn, ripped or faulty, the seller has a legal duty to put it right as your contract is with it.

Secondly, you are not necessarily entitled to a refund or replacement just because you used a credit card.

Buying by credit card just gives you another avenue to follow.
Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act makes the credit provider equally responsible with the seller for the performance of the contract. In other words, you can seek that very same remedy mentioned above via your card issuer or the seller.
You might want to read MSE's Section 75 article for more detail.

Of course you can continue dealing with Sony under their manufacturer's warranty if you wish, but that is unlikely to lead to a refund and your credit card will not help you there.

JJ_Egan

Its the vendor you go to under the Sale Of Goods Act/ CRA .
Likewise what does the warranty say ??

Sony do not have to offer a refund or exchange .

Mik77

Would the vendor be Richer Sounds.

I've not checked the warranty, will have a look. When I rang the store back in March they back heeled it straight to Sony stating it's within the first 12 months.

Would I be right in assuming I have a right to ask Richer Sounds to sort this out.

JJ_Egan

Yes vendor Richer sounds .
Yes under the law ball in their court .

bris

Richer sounds will just take longer and get you the same result.


S75 is not a money back guarantee, they have the same rights as the vendor and that is a resolution. Sony are providing that resolution so until they don't you don't have any where else to go.

Mik77

Ok thanks for the input folks. Pleased I'm more enlightened. I'll add a bit more pressure to Sony

Altarf

bris wrote: »

S75 is not a money back guarantee, they have the same rights as the vendor and that is a resolution. Sony are providing that resolution so until they don't you don't have any where else to go.

Sony haven't provided a fix though.

Under s75 the credit card company is jointly and severally liable.

This means that you don't have to bother with the retailer at all, but can go straight to the credit card company (although the credit card company may prefer you approach the retailer, you don't have to).

As Richer Sounds have fobbed you of to Sony, that would be my cue to invoke s75.

The credit card company won't have any contracts with repairers, so they have two options-
1. Tell you to get lost.
2. Refund you.

Which do you think they will choose.

And from speaking from personal experience of using s75 on a number of occasions, option 2 is what happens.

teedee

Firstly, Your contract is with Richer Sounds, they cannot just pass you off to Sony. You should contact them and inform them that the TV is not of 'Merchandisable Quality' and you would like a refund of the full purchase price. Keep a copy of this letter as you will need to show it to your credit card company if Richer Sounds still denies liability.
It is my understanding of Section 75 claims that some credit card company's will only accept responsibility if the company that you used the card to pay and themselves are the only ones liable. whether this is right or wrong, I have seen it reported on this forum. So Sony may need to be kept out of the claim at this stage. It's important that your claim is for a refund for faulty goods from Richer Sounds and not a claim for a repair under warranty.
Hope this helps.

neilmcl

teedee wrote: »

Firstly, Your contract is with Richer Sounds, they cannot just pass you off to Sony. You should contact them and inform them that the TV is not of 'Merchandisable Quality' and you would like a refund of the full purchase price. Keep a copy of this letter as you will need to show it to your credit card company if Richer Sounds still denies liability.
It is my understanding of Section 75 claims that some credit card company's will only accept responsibility if the company that you used the card to pay and themselves are the only ones liable. whether this is right or wrong, I have seen it reported on this forum. So Sony may need to be kept out of the claim at this stage. It's important that your claim is for a refund for faulty goods from Richer Sounds and not a claim for a repair under warranty.
Hope this helps.

OK, first off, the OP may be entitled to a remedy, which can be a refund, but can also be a repair or replacement. As it's been over 6 months they're not entitled to a full refund either and at also the onus is now on the OP to prove the fault is inherent to manufacture.

Personally I'd allow Sony to send someone out and diagnose the fault and then armed with that they can decide how they want to proceed.