Panasonic vs. Samsung tv

Legacy_user

I've put a claim in on my contents insurance for a damaged tv but the insurance company haven't offered what I think is a suitable like-for-like replacement. The model we original had was a Samsung - a more 'premium' reliable brand than the model they've offered us, a Panasonic, albeit has the same features and same screen size. I've researched online and the model in question is approx £200 less than what we paid for ours. Where do I stand on this? The third party who are sorting out the replacement say they need the OK from the insurance before they offer me the same brand at least.

paddyandstumpy

The price of tv's drops so fast it's not really comparable to compare what you paid for yours and what you are being offered. What makes yours more of a 'premium brand'?
Did you have a Samsung (for example) - and they are offering a Hitachi?

The insurer should replace as like for like as possible, with the same manufacturer where possible.

Ask them why they have suggested this alternate.

System

It's a Samsung and they're offering a Panasonic. It has the same spec in terms of Smart 4K etc and screen size but I thought brand for brand was part of the criteria as well. The tv was a gift for my husband and Samsung was specifically what he wanted as it's a good quality manufacturer. I wouldn't have bought him a Panasonic, personally.

paddyandstumpy

I wouldn't accept that either, you bought a Samsung, if one is still available they should offer you that. If their suppliers are unable to source one (which is why I think you were offered the Pano) then they should cash settle to the cost of replacement, less your excess.

Speak to the insurer, I suspect you've been dealing with their appointed supplier regarding this.

agrinnall

I'd rate Samsung and Panasonic as very similar in quality, I have bought both in the last year and there's little significant difference.

paddyandstumpy

agrinnall wrote: »

I'd rate Samsung and Panasonic as very similar in quality, I have bought both in the last year and there's little significant difference.

This isn't the point though, the OP had one thing, and the insurer is trying to replace it with a lesser brand, in the OP's opinion (and in mine also).

Nearlyold

paddyandstumpy wrote: »

This isn't the point though, the OP had one thing, and the insurer is trying to replace it with a lesser brand, in the OP's opinion (and in mine also).

The OP's insurer term and conditions probably allow them to replace one brand of TV with another of the same spec and quality. I can see nothing in on line reviews of the two brands in question that particularly holds up the assertion that Samsung is a premium brand in comparison to Panasonic

paddyandstumpy

MissSJL - who is your insurer? Does it explicitly say in your wording, and on your key facts, items will be replaced with brands that are considered similar?

If it doesn't, you are entitled to the same goods that you had pre loss.

I maintain what Nearlyold is suggesting isn't market norm, therefore if the wording exists in the OP's policy it's an unusual limitation and should be on the key facts.

Nearlyold

Most insurance policies simply use the phrase "replace" or "replacement" without defining whether that means an identical or similar item but in itself "replace" does not imply that the "replacement" is identical.

Having said that in the OPs case as Samsung TVs are easily available there should be no reason why they should not be able to supply one though I would suspect that the actual model has already been discontinued such is the pace of change in telly land

dunstonh

Nearlyold wrote: »

The OP's insurer term and conditions probably allow them to replace one brand of TV with another of the same spec and quality. I can see nothing in on line reviews of the two brands in question that particularly holds up the assertion that Samsung is a premium brand in comparison to Panasonic

If anything, Panasonic tend to get a better review on picture quality although Samsung set designs tend to be more "trendy".

FutureGirl

Your policy will say that they will replace like for like, or equivalent, based on the specifications. Not the brand. I've had some FOS decisions come down that show the FOS take this stance as well.