Threatened with the police if I ask for a chargeback

neilmcl

KeithP wrote: »

All you need from the 'computer repair shop' is a report that confirms the problem, and states that in their opinion the problem is due to a manufacturing defect.

And as stated, none of the ones the OP has gone to are willing to make that opinion in writing.

KeithP wrote: »

If that's so, then a chargeback will fail simply because there is a time limit on a chargeback of 120 days following the sale.

This is also incorrect and quite a common misconception. The 120 days limit is the time from when you become aware of the problem, the overall time limit can be up to 540 days from purchase.

steampowered

The Consumer Rights Act provides that, after six months, the burden of proof is on the consumer to prove that the goods were defective on the date of delivery.

Unless you have good reason to believe there was a manufacturing fault in the motherboard I think you may struggle unfortunately.

You can read your warranty terms to see if you are covered, but I suspect the warranty only runs from the date of purchase.

Unadjusted

Thanks for all the helpful advice!

I had mistakenly thought that as this laptop, which is the replacement of the original, is only three months old it'd be simple enough to prove it has the same manufacturing fault as the last one. But as Neil points out the repair shops really don't want to put that in writing and those were the honest ones most will just take my money and write a report saying they're unsure.

I am going to call a couple more shop today and see if I get anywhere but if that doesn't work I'll call my bank again and ask about using my section 75 protection.

wesleyad

Unadjusted wrote: »

Thanks for all the helpful advice!

I had mistakenly thought that as this laptop, which is the replacement of the original, is only three months old it'd be simple enough to prove it has the same manufacturing fault as the last one.

So the replacement is broken after 3 months? Does that not then become a "new" transaction and have the 6 months start again? Otherwise a situation where something breaks after 5 months is replaced by something that then breaks after 2 months wouldn't be covered which seem wrong?

KeithP

wesleyad wrote: »

So the replacement is broken after 3 months? Does that not then become a "new" transaction and have the 6 months start again? Otherwise a situation where something breaks after 5 months is replaced by something that then breaks after 2 months wouldn't be covered which seem wrong?

No, times are counted from the sale.

There has only been one sale.

brianposter

The fact that you have had two laptops which both failed with the same symptoms within a year would normally indicate a design or manufacturing fault.
On the balance of probability that may be sufficient for a court.

Carrot007

brianposter wrote: »

The fact that you have had two laptops which both failed with the same symptoms within a year would normally indicate a design or manufacturing fault.
On the balance of probability that may be sufficient for a court.

To see the other side, I would think it just as much shows that the consumer is doing the same wrong thing to the item.

Not saying it's the case here. But all is indicates is the same things is happening. Not why.