Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Am I covered?

MickyJ

Hi, guys I wonder if anyone could help advise me on the following: I purchased a camera from Jessops three months ago. Recently, I discovered that the camera has a damaged sensor. I can honestly say that I have not done anything to cause the damage - I have hardly used the camera, and it has been looked after more carefully than a new-born baby :-) I took the camera back to the store and requested a replacement under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I also presented a letter to the assistant stating this fact. I understand that the retailer can, however, choose to repair the camera at no cost to myself if they can prove there is disproportionate cost difference. I also understand that it is up to the retailer to PROVE that the damage was not present before I took possession of the camera. However... the assistant tried (in not so many words) to say that the damage had been caused AFTER I took possession. He advised that, after careful inspection, that someone had tried to clean or touch the image sensor which has left marks/scratches on it. I agreed that he could possibly be right about the cause, BUT neither I nor anyone else have gone anywhere near it. The assistant has now sent the camera back to the manufacturer advising that he will try to get it repaired under warranty. He advised, however, that I will probably get a charge for the repair (which will likely equate to around the same cost of a new camera, from experience) if the manufacturer states that the damage wasn't caused by themselves. I've included a copy of the letter here for those who would like more detail. Any help that anyone could give would be most helpful. I'm just concerned that Jessops and the manufacturer will just fob me off between them. Dear Sir I purchased the following item via the Jessops website on the 9th of March 2016: Fujifilm X-T10 Compact System Camera in Silver + XC16-50mm MKII Lens. I'm sorry to say that I've been having some trouble with the camera ever since I first received it, but I initially assumed I was just inexperienced at using it correctly. When the issues I was having continued, however, I decided to take a closer look at the camera instead. It wasn't until I removed the lens and took a look inside the camera that I noticed the image sensor is covered in scratches. I must admit that I haven't taken any notice of the sensor before - I've only ever taken the lens off once or twice, and I've never had any interest in doing so. I've certainly never touched or messed about with the sensor or left it exposed at any point. At first, I wasn't sure if the scratches had anything to do with the problems I'd been experiencing - in fact, I wasn't even sure that there was any cause for concern at all - until, that is, an experienced photographer was quick to enlighten me to the contrary! The scratches have most certainly been there since before I received the camera because I've been experiencing the same problems right from the start. As such, I'm very much hoping I can have a replacement or a repair carried out under the warranty - I've only had the camera for three months. To reference my statutory rights, I would much prefer a replacement of the camera; I understand, however, that you can choose to repair the camera instead if you can show that there is a disproportionate difference in cost between the two options. I most certainly would have returned the camera straight away had I been aware of the scratched sensor and had the experience to recognise this as such a serious concern. For reference, I've included both a copy of my online order confirmation (receipt) and my warranty registration. Thanks most kindly, and best regards

naedanger

MickyJ wrote: »

Hi, guys I wonder if anyone could help advise me on the following: I purchased a camera from Jessops three months ago. Recently, I discovered that the camera has a damaged sensor. I can honestly say that I have not done anything to cause the damage - I have hardly used the camera, and it has been looked after more carefully than a new-born baby :-) I took the camera back to the store and requested a replacement under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I also presented a letter to the assistant stating this fact. I understand that the retailer can, however, choose to repair the camera at no cost to myself if they can prove there is disproportionate cost difference. I also understand that it is up to the retailer to PROVE that the damage was not present before I took possession of the camera. However... the assistant tried (in not so many words) to say that the damage had been caused AFTER I took possession. He advised that, after careful inspection, that someone had tried to clean or touch the image sensor which has left marks/scratches on it. I agreed that he could possibly be right about the cause, BUT neither I nor anyone else have gone anywhere near it. The assistant has now sent the camera back to the manufacturer advising that he will try to get it repaired under warranty. He advised, however, that I will probably get a charge for the repair (which will likely equate to around the same cost of a new camera, from experience) if the manufacturer states that the damage wasn't caused by themselves. I've included a copy of the letter here for those who would like more detail. Any help that anyone could give would be most helpful. I'm just concerned that Jessops and the manufacturer will just fob me off between them. Dear Sir I purchased the following item via the Jessops website on the 9th of March 2016: Fujifilm X-T10 Compact System Camera in Silver + XC16-50mm MKII Lens. I'm sorry to say that I've been having some trouble with the camera ever since I first received it, but I initially assumed I was just inexperienced at using it correctly. When the issues I was having continued, however, I decided to take a closer look at the camera instead. It wasn't until I removed the lens and took a look inside the camera that I noticed the image sensor is covered in scratches. I must admit that I haven't taken any notice of the sensor before - I've only ever taken the lens off once or twice, and I've never had any interest in doing so. I've certainly never touched or messed about with the sensor or left it exposed at any point. At first, I wasn't sure if the scratches had anything to do with the problems I'd been experiencing - in fact, I wasn't even sure that there was any cause for concern at all - until, that is, an experienced photographer was quick to enlighten me to the contrary! The scratches have most certainly been there since before I received the camera because I've been experiencing the same problems right from the start. As such, I'm very much hoping I can have a replacement or a repair carried out under the warranty - I've only had the camera for three months. To reference my statutory rights, I would much prefer a replacement of the camera; I understand, however, that you can choose to repair the camera instead if you can show that there is a disproportionate difference in cost between the two options. I most certainly would have returned the camera straight away had I been aware of the scratched sensor and had the experience to recognise this as such a serious concern. For reference, I've included both a copy of my online order confirmation (receipt) and my warranty registration. Thanks most kindly, and best regards

You are correct - it is for the retailer to prove that the fault was not present when you bought the camera. But they only need to prove this on the balance of probability - in other words that it is more likely than not that the problem was caused after purchase.

If after detailed inspection they say the damage is typical of someone badly cleaning a sensor then, in the absence of counter evidence from you, they may have enough evidence to prove their case on the balance of probability, especially if a layman (such as a judge) could see the sensor is marked.

Also how does the flaw manifest itself in the photos? If there are obvious marks in the photos a judge might question why you did not look to get the fault rectified sooner.

So if they do come back with this response I suggest you gather counter evidence. For example your own independent expert's report stating the damage is consistent with an inherent fault or perhaps your earliest photos showing the damage existed from outset (however unless your photos are of events that could only have been taken at a specific time I am not sure how you could show the photos were indeed taken shortly after purchase).

Keep_pedalling

All the images taken will contain EXIF data, showing amoung other things date taken, and details of the camera used, so it should be relatively easy to show if the damage was present from day one.

If it had been however, why did you not notice it earlier?

MickyJ

Thanks. If that's the case, then I suppose I've already lost. I can't prove anything. I'm already aware that the damage is consistent with someone cleaning the sensor, and probability would state that it would have happened after purchase. I'll give them a ring tomorrow and just tell them to send it back. I can't afford a repair or replacement, and I hate confrontation. Lesson learned - inspect your goods carefully straight away - especially if they cost you a whole year's worth of savings on minimum wage. :-(

naedanger

MickyJ wrote: »

Thanks. If that's the case, then I suppose I've already lost. I can't prove anything. I'm already aware that the damage is consistent with someone cleaning the sensor, and probability would state that it would have happened after purchase. I'll give them a ring tomorrow and just tell them to send it back. I can't afford a repair or replacement, and I hate confrontation. Lesson learned - inspect your goods carefully straight away - especially if they cost you a whole year's worth of savings on minimum wage. :-(

Unfortunately if the matter goes to court then a judge can only decide based on what he or she thinks is mostly likely based on the evidence.

Perhaps you will get lucky and the repair will be less expensive than indicated or even free (but to be honest I would not be too hopeful).

Someone else may have a better idea.

System

Sometimes it's not for the seller to prove their case within the first six months.

See 15b: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/19/enacted

(14)For the purposes of subsections (3)(b) and (c) and (4), goods which do not conform to the contract at any time within the period of six months beginning with the day on which the goods were delivered to the consumer must be taken not to have conformed to it on that day.

(15)Subsection (14) does not apply if—
(a)it is established that the goods did conform to the contract on that day, or
(b)its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or with how they fail to conform to the contract.

Which exists specifically to cover cases where the customer could have done something like damage the item after receiving it. Several months later, you are the one that needs to show it arrived in the condition you claim. But lucky for you It's a camera, so any problem that has been affecting the image from day one, must surely be evident on all of your photos?

naedanger

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

All the images taken will contain EXIF data, showing amoung other things date taken, and details of the camera used, so it should be relatively easy to show if the damage was present from day one.

If it had been however, why did you not notice it earlier?

Not sure the EXIF date in isolation would be good enough evidence since you could easily generate a different date just by changing the date in the camera, taking a few photos, and then changing the date in the camera back again.

wealdroam

MickyJ wrote: »

I'm sorry to say that I've been having some trouble with the camera ever since I first received it, but I initially assumed I was just inexperienced at using it correctly. When the issues I was having continued, however, I decided to take a closer look at the camera instead.

Several posters have now asked "what is the trouble you have had since day one"?

How can you attribute this "trouble" to the scratched sensor?

Keep_pedalling

naedanger wrote: »

Not sure the EXIF date in isolation would be good enough evidence since you could easily generate a different date just by changing the date in the camera, taking a few photos, and then changing the date in the camera back again.

You could do that but the file numbering would be out of sequence.

MickyJ

The 'trouble' I've been having won't help prove anything I'm afraid. It was all to do with the quality of the images. I haven't kept any of the images I shot anyway, because I haven't used it for anything really - just been practicing in the back garden taking photos of the gate and trees, just to get used to the camera. I bought it ready to go on holidays, but we never went in the end. Maybe I did damage the sensor somehow? I have no idea how, though. I suppose it only takes a bit of grit or such to work it's way in there - or if I somehow managed to damage it without realising. On well - only two choices, I'm afraid: Buy a new camera for £450 or go without. The repair will likely not be cost effective. Perhaps I could sell it on ebay for parts - maybe get a couple of quid back. It's all my stupid fault, anyway - I know next to nothing about cameras, so I should never have got it. I actually thought the sensor was just a bit of glass that covered the working bits of the camera. Shows how much I know. They should come with a warning: If you're a complete novice, do not buy! lol.

wealdroam

naedanger wrote: »

Not sure the EXIF date in isolation would be good enough evidence since you could easily generate a different date just by changing the date in the camera, taking a few photos, and then changing the date in the camera back again.

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

You could do that but the file numbering would be out of sequence.

Exif data can easily be edited anyway - here's just one free Exif editor.