Currys refusing to replace Smart TV they lost

naedanger

zahidf wrote: »

Is that the case if they lost the TV, rather then them saying they couldn't repair it?

Yes, it is their choice whether to repair, replace or (partially) refund.

Then we are getting into duty of care and negligence. ( which they have already admitted to I guess)

I don't think they will deny they are liable.

How would paying by credit card help? is that something the credit card would refund

Yes it would help if you paid by credit card. You would not be entitled to a better remedy than you are entitled to under law, but you could hold the credit card company liable rather than Argos. The cc company are legally required to have a complaint process that conforms to certain regulatory standards which you could follow at no cost. However it will be quite a slow process so I suggest you try to pressure Argos to improve their offer - by explaining why you believe the JVC is not an equivalent or similar brand e.g. by giving them examples of comparable new tvs where the sony is significantly more expensive. (From the cases on this board Argos usually seem to be quite good at offering a reasonable remedy, so I would try with them first.)

For claiming against your cc company see the following:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases

zahidf

naedanger wrote: »

Yes, it is their choice whether to repair, replace or (partially) refund.


I don't think they will deny they are liable.



Yes it would help if you paid by credit card. You would not be entitled to a better remedy than you are entitled to under law, but you could hold the credit card company liable rather than Argos. The cc company are legally required to have a complaint process that conforms to certain regulatory standards which you could follow at no cost. However it will be quite a slow process so I suggest you try to pressure Argos to improve their offer - by explaining why you believe the JVC is not an equivalent or similar brand e.g. by giving them examples of comparable new tvs where the sony is significantly more expensive. (From the cases on this board Argos usually seem to be quite good at offering a reasonable remedy, so I would try with them first.)

For claiming against your cc company see the following:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases

It's Currys alas, not argos. Currys are one of the worse companies I've ever had to deal with.


I will look into the credit card issues. It's terrible customer service to lose our TV, and then fail to replace it with the same TV they lost!

wealdroam

naedanger wrote: »

Yes it would help if you paid by credit card. You would not be entitled to a better remedy than you are entitled to under law, but you could hold the credit card company liable rather than Argos. The cc company are legally required to have a complaint process that conforms to certain regulatory standards which you could follow at no cost. However it will be quite a slow process so I suggest you try to pressure Argos to improve their offer - by explaining why you believe the JVC is not an equivalent or similar brand e.g. by giving them examples of comparable new tvs where the sony is significantly more expensive. (From the cases on this board Argos usually seem to be quite good at offering a reasonable remedy, so I would try with them first.)

For claiming against your cc company see the following:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases

Argos?????

neilmcl

dsdhall wrote: »

Maybe you should ask for the TV back from Currys, get it repaired/replaced by Sony for free.

You seem to have missed the whole point of this thread.

naedanger

zahidf wrote: »

It's Currys alas, not argos. Currys are one of the worse companies I've ever had to deal with.

Sorry.

I will look into the credit card issues. It's terrible customer service to lose our TV, and then fail to replace it with the same TV they lost!

One final point, mentioned earlier, if you need to take legal action then you will probably be pursuing a claim under the CRA rather than under the warranty the onus is on you to prove, on the balance of probability the tv was inherently faulty.

However I don't think that will present any difficulty. You can state you did not abuse it and then the most likely cause will be that the tv was not sufficiently durable (which is an inherent fault). Since the tv no longer exists through no fault of your own it obviously cannot be tested by anyone.

alumende27

neilmcl wrote: »

You seem to have missed the whole point of this thread.

No, but thanks for your snide comment.

The fact is that Sony will happily repair or replace a TV within the first twelve months. If curry's cannot return the TV to the OP so he can get Sony to fix/replace it then they should provide him with something that would put him in the same situation. Either a full refund or an equivalent TV.

He should work his way up the curry's complaints process as outlined on resolver.co.uk here: http://www.resolver.co.uk/freeadvice/services/726/issues

warehouse

It won't help your case OP but others reading this who are considering purchasing a TV might want to take note.

I purchased a decent TV from Richer Sounds which came with their usual 5 year guarantee. Two months before the guarantee ended the TV went wrong. They couldn't repair it as parts weren't available, so they gave us a brand new TV that was worth more than the original cost, with a new 5 year guarantee on top.

Be careful where you buy from.

zahidf

naedanger wrote: »

Sorry.



One final point, mentioned earlier, if you need to take legal action then you will probably be pursuing a claim under the CRA rather than under the warranty the onus is on you to prove, on the balance of probability the tv was inherently faulty.

However I don't think that will present any difficulty. You can state you did not abuse it and then the most likely cause will be that the tv was not sufficiently durable (which is an inherent fault). Since the tv no longer exists through no fault of your own it obviously cannot be tested by anyone.

I'll probably claim it under both, in that there is a contractual obligation on them, and also one in Law with the CRA. They have admitted already that the repair of the TV was covered under the care plan, so I can't see how they can dispute that aspect of it.


I'm hoping that the letter before action will be enough for someone to get their heads out of their !!! on this on their end.

naedanger

zahidf wrote: »

I'll probably claim it under both, in that there is a contractual obligation on them, and also one in Law with the CRA. They have admitted already that the repair of the TV was covered under the care plan, so I can't see how they can dispute that aspect of it.


I'm hoping that the letter before action will be enough for someone to get their heads out of their !!! on this on their end.

Claiming under both is probably best. (My thought would be that they might be complying with the warranty, since it does not say the replacement will be an equivalent brand only a similar or equivalent spec.) However I would probably claim under both, and for the full amount under the warranty if your tv is still on general sale at the full price. (Then the court can decide.)

CoolHotCold

If the same machine is still in stock, pop into your local, and ask them to overwrite the amount.

If you're still wanting the same one, then it shouldn't be an issue. So long as there is a reasonable reason as to why the amount is more, it should be fine.