Panasonic TV or PVR? Cannot watch ITV HD? - CLAIM NOW

BlowinMyTop

Hi All,,

Do you have or know someone with a Panasonic TV or Recorder that cannot view ITV HD?

IF SO, YOU SHOULD CLAIM IMMEDIATELY BEFORE YOU RUN OUT OF TIME.

In 2011 I purchased a Panasonic Plasma TV with built in FreeSat. In December 2015, ITV HD stopped working and at first assumed it was an issue with the dish alignment. After testing the signal, I started to Google of which I came across an article on Join Free Sat in relation to Panasonic 2009 – 2012 televisions and their range of DMR XS350/BS750/BS780/BS850/BS880 DVD and BD PVR’s being unable to receive ITV HD.

I cannot post links here as yet but search "joinfreesat panasonic itv hd break up issues on panasonic tvs pvrs" where you will find it.

I contacted Panasonic who insisted that the issue was caused by ITV who had changed the way they transmitted thier signal and that my TV was old and should be updated.

Not happy with this, I started to research and found that ITV had changed from QPSK to 8PSK and the Forward Error Correction [FEC] of 3/4 from 1/2. Panasonic claim on their website that if your TV is affect you should instead watch the Standard Definition version (not helpful) and infer it is ITV's failing.

I contacted my retailer (Appliances Direct) to inform them I could not watch ITV HD on FreeSat where I got the reply "as your TV also has FreeView capabilities, then we suggest you purchase an aerial".

I was in court with the retailer on the 19th June 2017 which is why I am posting here.

If you have a TV or PVR that cannot view or record ITV HD then you must start Small Claims immediately as time is against you. Many of these TV's and PVR's are approaching or beyond the 6 year time limit for a court claim which is why you must claim now.

The issue is that these Panasonic devices have a flaw that was within them the day they left the factory and fail to meet the Internationally Recognised DVB-S2 TV reception Standard so incapable to decoding correctly the channels.

My claim was successful and the hearing lasted less than 20 minutes as the specification for the TV clearly states it complies to DVB-S2 Standard and capable of receiving 8PSK FEC 3/4 which it is clearly not.

Contact me if you need evidence for your court hearing as I am happy to offer the information and details I used for my claim.

Panasonic are legally obliged to fix this issue under Sale of Goods Act and are refusing to accept it is their problem and blaming both FreeSat and ITV. They are telling customers their equipment is out of date (absolutely not the case) and offering false information to retailers as a defense for court.

DoaM

BlowinMyTop wrote: »

Panasonic are legally obliged to fix this issue under Sale of Goods Act

No they're not ... UNLESS you actually bought direct from Panasonic. The retailer is liable for the issue and it is the retailer you'd file any small claim against.

wealdroam

BlowinMyTop wrote: »

Hi All,,

Do you have or know someone with a Panasonic TV or Recorder that cannot view ITV HD?

IF SO, YOU SHOULD CLAIM IMMEDIATELY BEFORE YOU RUN OUT OF TIME.

In 2011 I purchased a Panasonic Plasma TV with built in FreeSat. In December 2015, ITV HD stopped working and at first assumed it was an issue with the dish alignment. After testing the signal, I started to Google of which I came across an article on Join Free Sat in relation to Panasonic 2009 – 2012 televisions and their range of DMR XS350/BS750/BS780/BS850/BS880 DVD and BD PVR’s being unable to receive ITV HD.

I cannot post links here as yet but search "joinfreesat panasonic itv hd break up issues on panasonic tvs pvrs" where you will find it.

I contacted Panasonic who insisted that the issue was caused by ITV who had changed the way they transmitted thier signal and that my TV was old and should be updated.

Not happy with this, I started to research and found that ITV had changed from QPSK to 8PSK and the Forward Error Correction [FEC] of 3/4 from 1/2. Panasonic claim on their website that if your TV is affect you should instead watch the Standard Definition version (not helpful) and infer it is ITV's failing.

I contacted my retailer (Appliances Direct) to inform them I could not watch ITV HD on FreeSat where I got the reply "as your TV also has FreeView capabilities, then we suggest you purchase an aerial".

I was in court with the retailer on the 19th June 2017 which is why I am posting here.

If you have a TV or PVR that cannot view or record ITV HD then you must start Small Claims immediately as time is against you. Many of these TV's and PVR's are approaching or beyond the 6 year time limit for a court claim which is why you must claim now.

The issue is that these Panasonic devices have a flaw that was within them the day they left the factory and fail to meet the Internationally Recognised DVB-S2 TV reception Standard so incapable to decoding correctly the channels.

My claim was successful and the hearing lasted less than 20 minutes as the specification for the TV clearly states it complies to DVB-S2 Standard and capable of receiving 8PSK FEC 3/4 which it is clearly not.

Contact me if you need evidence for your court hearing as I am happy to offer the information and details I used for my claim.

Panasonic are legally obliged to fix this issue under Sale of Goods Act and are refusing to accept it is their problem and blaming both FreeSat and ITV. They are telling customers their equipment is out of date (absolutely not the case) and offering false information to retailers as a defense for court.

Thanks for that. Very interesting.

Are you sure that "Panasonic are legally obliged to fix this issue under Sale of Goods Act"?
My understanding is that whoever sold the thing to you, in your case Appliances Direct, has that obligation - not the manufacturer.

You tell us that your claim against Appliances Direct was successful.
What exactly does that mean?
What were Appliances Direct instructed to do?

Can I point out that Appliances Direct's obligation is actually to supply a remedy, where that remedy could be either a repair, a replacement or a refund.
You, the consumer, can specify your preferred remedy but you cannot force the seller to provide a remedy that is disproportionate. That effectively means that the seller can choose the most cost effective remedy.
I would guess that the most cost effective remedy for a television that is around six years old would be a refund.
I am sure you know that in this situation any refund can be reduced to take account of the six years use you have had of the television.
I wonder what the value of a reduced refund might be for a six year old television set.

Please do post again when the resolution is complete.

BlowinMyTop

The manufacture does have responsibilities to remedy a major fault within one of their products..

They refuse to accept the issue lays with them and fix it, therefore my claim (and contract) falls with the retailer of which I have just successfully sued on Monday and received damages as to my losses.

Panasonic are the only entity capable of fixing the issue that is affecting 100's or 1000's of pieces of equipment and therefore should take responsibility to fix it.

Panasonic have spent the last 18 months blaming ITV and FreeSat for the problem which is ultimately due to the TV itself not complying with harmonised DVB Standards as accepted globally.

5 yrs and 7 months old and I got £125 plus costs back as the flaw was inherent from the day it was purchased.

wealdroam

BlowinMyTop wrote: »

The manufacture does have responsibilities to remedy a major fault within one of their products..

They refuse to accept the issue lays with them and fix it, therefore my claim (and contract) falls with the retailer of which I have just successfully sued on Monday and received damages as to my losses.

Panasonic are the only entity capable of fixing the issue that is affecting 100's or 1000's of pieces of equipment and therefore should take responsibility to fix it.

Panasonic have spent the last 18 months blaming ITV and FreeSat for the problem which is ultimately due to the TV itself not complying with harmonised DVB Standards as accepted globally.

5 yrs and 7 months old and I got £125 plus costs back as the flaw was inherent from the day it was purchased.

Thanks for that. Have Appliances Direct paid up yet?

As I said earlier, I don't know how the manufacturer has the responsibilities you describe under The Sale of Goods Act.

Please can you give us more details about your belief that Panasonic has responsibilities to the consumer to fix a product that is inherently faulty.

[Deleted User]

BlowinMyTop wrote: »

5 yrs and 7 months old and I got £125 plus costs back as the flaw was inherent from the day it was purchased.

That's not a bad return. I expect you've still been viewing ITV HD via a separate decoder? You've certainly had that (cheap) option.

I doubt there will be a rush of claims or any retrospective "fix" for TV models which are over five years old.

DoaM

How much did you pay originally? £125 still sounds like a good partial refund after almost 6 years, even if you'd paid £1,200. (Although it was at about the 4 year mark that the complaint started, so the refund should be on that basis).

Basically this saga has cost AD the court costs on top of the partial refund. If they'd accepted the claim at the outset then they'd probably have got away with £125 payment.

BlowinMyTop

Hi

I paid £649 as it was on offer, originally £1199 if memory serves me correct.

Appliances Direct are paying today or tomorrow and I have no worries about them complying with payment within 30 days as I am sure they don't want it showing as outstanding.

I am watching via HUMAX HDR, but not the point as the TV should be capable, hence the claim. It was also the response I got originally from AD that as the TV also supported FreeView, then "I should install an aerial" and watch using FreeView instead.

The BBC will one day switch BBC ONE to regional variation and this will be affect also the same way.

Responsibility may not fall into the SOGA but the manufacture is bound in other ways to rectify, especially as the TV claims to meet and carries the DVB Logo as well as FreeSat HD and 1080HD Logos. They have used the DVB-S2 Licence and Logo for a piece of equipment what did not comply.

The main reason for the comment here was to encourage anyone else affected to stake a claim rather than be bluffed off by Panasonic's false claims as to the reason, which is still on their website and Trading Standards have been informed in order to have it as it should read "ITV HD cannot be viewed on FreeSat versions of our equipment due to an error in our design." and not claim that your "TV is too old and they cannot be responsible for ITV changing transmission formats, although the formats they are using are fully documented in the DVB-S2 the specification portray it complies to.

As this was a 'fault from new' and not something that happened later, the judge took light of 4 years of being able to view ITV HD prior to the switch-over and beyond as well as the risk of the BBC following suit, which is the reason for the higher compensation value.

Although it was 5 years and 7 months, he accepted my argument that until ITV actually started using it then those affected would be unaware and if ITV had changed earlier, my compliant would have been sooner if that makes sense.

The fact the fault was inherent and not later developed meant that it was faulty when I purchased it and demands a higher payment. They offered £80 which I rejected for reasons I wanted to prove in court my gut feeling as to the real reasons the TV didn't work and to use the outcome to help others.

I originally claimed £200 (the difference between FULL HD and HD READY available at the time).

[Deleted User]

BlowinMyTop wrote: »

I wanted to prove in court my gut feeling as to the real reasons the TV didn't work and to use the outcome to help others.

I sincerely doubt your success will impact or help anyone else. Happy to be proven wrong!

gycraig_2

Seems a lot of effort for about 100 quid

BlowinMyTop

Sometimes it is more the principle than the reward... Panasonic are misleading and lying to customers as to the cause which is wrong and unjust.

Seems a lot of negativity on a site put up to assist and advise others..