faulty led lights

bozzy18

Hi folks, about 15 to 18 months ago I purchased 6 led ceiling lights from Amazon at a cost of £39.99 each. Reviews were good. We paid an electrician £150 to install them all. Since then over the past 6 months one by one these lights have stopped working - we've had to buy new lights and pay for the electrican £30 a time to come back and install the replacement lights. Another one stopped working last night - we have one more left but we're expecting that to stop working any time given its track record!


Amazon have agreed to fully refund us for the lights but what about the electrician costs. They have refused this - what are my rights? I didn't think it was fair that the lights which was supposedly to last 50000 hours stopped working due to an internal fault.


Cheers,


Boz

societys_child

we've had to buy new lights and pay for the electrican £30 a time to come back and install the replacement lights

Do you mean to change the bulb(s) ?

jamesperrett

Many LED fittings don't have removable 'bulbs'. If it stops working you throw the whole thing away and replace it with a complete new fitting.

I'd suggest sticking with well known brands for these fittings.

bozzy18

hindsight is a wonderful thing! this is the light we purchased:-


https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00L44KNZS/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s03?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Head_The_Ball

bozzy18 wrote: »

...Amazon have agreed to fully refund us for the lights but what about the electrician costs. They have refused this - what are my rights? I didn't think it was fair that the lights which was supposedly to last 50000 hours stopped working due to an internal fault....

You have little or no chance of getting any business to agree to pay you for those costs.

In law, as far as I am aware, Amazon (indeed any supplier) are only responsible for replacing or refunding the lights.

Allowing such claims would open up the floodgates of expensive claims for the failure of a low cost item and perhaps make many business models unsustainable.

Are you unable to replace the light fittings yourself? That should be simple as all the wiring is presumably still there.

wealdroam

Head_The_Ball wrote: »

You have little or no chance of getting any business to agree to pay you for those costs.

In law, as far as I am aware, Amazon (indeed any supplier) are only responsible for replacing or refunding the lights.

Allowing such claims would open up the floodgates of expensive claims for the failure of a low cost item and perhaps make many business models unsustainable.

Are you unable to replace the light fittings yourself? That should be simple as all the wiring is presumably still there.

It appears that these lights have been deemed inherently faulty.

If that's the case then the seller is not only responsible for the replacement, but also any cost associated with that.

Section 23 of The Consumer Rights Act 2015 includes:

23 Right to repair or replacement

(2) If the consumer requires the trader to repair or replace the goods, the trader must—

(a) do so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer, and

(b) bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).

casper_g

wealdroam wrote: »

It appears that these lights have been deemed inherently faulty.

If that's the case then the seller is not only responsible for the replacement, but also any cost associated with that.

Section 23 of The Consumer Rights Act 2015 includes:

23 Right to repair or replacement

(2) If the consumer requires the trader to repair or replace the goods, the trader must—

(a) do so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer, and

(b) bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).

Interesting. Is there any guidance/precedent to help interpret the word "necessary" there?

Personally, it wouldn't occur to me to pay an electrician to do a like-for-like swap of a faulty light fitting, so can it be said to be "necessary" to do so? I suppose it is necessary if the householder does not believe themselves to be competent to carry out the work.

societys_child

Out of 52 customer reviews only 3 have given a 1 star rating, with 38 giving 5 stars. A further 6 gave 4 stars.
The op seems to have been unlucky.

martinsurrey

societys_child wrote: »

Out of 52 customer reviews only 3 have given a 1 star rating, with 38 giving 5 stars. A further 6 gave 4 stars.
The op seems to have been unlucky.

reviews are done after a month or so in general, these started to fail after 9.

could be a life span issue that effects a lot of people, but the reviews are set.

wealdroam

casper_g wrote: »

Interesting. Is there any guidance/precedent to help interpret the word "necessary" there?

Maybe not quite what you are looking for, but the Explanatory Notes to S23 of The CRA include:

Section 23: Right to repair or replacement

132. This section details a consumer’s right to insist on repair or replacement of faulty goods, the cost of which must be borne by the trader. This includes the trader bearing any costs involved in the removal of an installed item and reinstallation of a replacement.

So if there is no cost involved, e.g. the OP does the work himself, then the seller breathes a sigh of relief.

casper_g wrote: »

Personally, it wouldn't occur to me to pay an electrician to do a like-for-like swap of a faulty light fitting, so can it be said to be "necessary" to do so? I suppose it is necessary if the householder does not believe themselves to be competent to carry out the work.

Yes, I would agree with you.

I would interpret "necessary" as 'something that needs to be done'.
In the OP's case, removal of the old fitting and installation of the replacement 'needs to be done'.

martinsurrey

wealdroam wrote: »

Maybe not quite what you are looking for, but the Explanatory Notes to S23 of The CRA include:

So if there is no cost involved, e.g. the OP does the work himself, then the seller breathes a sigh of relief.



Yes, I would agree with you.

I would interpret "necessary" as 'something that needs to be done'.
In the OP's case, removal of the old fitting and installation of the replacement 'needs to be done'.

but where do you draw the line, its necessary to clip a shower curtain to the rail, getting a handy man around to do it would cost their minimum call out charge, say £30, does that mean its reasonable to get them to do it and make the retailer pay if the curtain is faulty?

That would be for the court to decide if it went that far.

Same as this case.