Issue with TV that I was sold, don't know where I stand?

mousemart

It's late so I'm not going to go through multi quoting you guys...

The display was released in Dec 2015 and the software supports it so that makes it what 2 or three years old in four weeks? - not telling porkies at all, besides even one year is approx 3000 hours of usage...

I have the note that was placed with the TV to inform me to speak to either one of two members of staff who later told me about the scratches (after i took possession) When the man explained to me about the scratches he told me 'We didn't have time to put the information on the screen' (exact words)

The dates, times etc are just small talk really. At the end of the day I asked and did all I was expected when buying the TV and the information was incorrect. In reality that's the end of the matter, when I spoke to the floor staff they have even admitted their mistakes and apologized (they are quite nice)

All of this comes under consumer protection of unfair trading, I have proof with the letter that the stock-guy was meant to give to me as well as members of staff already admitting that it's their fault.

To be fair, under unfair trading I can get damages for inconvenience as the well the 'distress' caused, obviously I'm not that distressed, just annoyed at the whole thing. I've spent an evening going through a lot of stuff with he consumer act and unfair trading regulations. In a way I've answered my own question, in an ideal world and if the retailer does not try and unfairly wriggle out of it, everything I've said is in the right and I should be OK

mousemart

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I recommend you just get a full refund, buy a brand new TV for a similar price and hang it on your newly fitted bracket.

If you go to court with this you'd need documentary evidence to support your allegations. You don't have any such evidence.

Every concern you have (other than perhaps the scratches) is based on questions you (allegedly) asked and answers you were (allegedly) given.

You certainly won't ever receive any additional award for fitting a bracket to your wall.

I went into the store with a budget to buy a brand new TV, even with a full refund I would not be able to buy a TV to the spec I had anticipated as I've spent some of the budget with a wall mount and works. This obviously causes me an inconvenience caused in part by the retailer. due to whats said above.

mousemart

stuartJo1989 wrote: »

Could this not be the price for the display model itself?

Well presumably the stock-man works in the stock room?

All I'm trying to say is that it is unlikely that the damage was present when you made the initial inquiry as to what damage was present.

This: "there are other dents/scratches in the frame of the TV now."

and "was told that a big scratch was on the screen"



Well... yes! But from the way you tell the story it seems like there was NO damage when you first viewed the item. It seems like the damage only happened sometime between being bubble-wrapped and you bringing this issue up. So I feel that the salesman WAS telling the truth...

I know your playing devils advocate here but it raises a good question, retailers are not allowed to 'discount a discount' say the TV was £1000 - and they reduced it to 750 - 25% off if it does not sell they are then not allowed to discount it to 500 and say 50% off

The discount has to be from that LAST price it was up for so it would still be 25% off @ 500 pound...

I was only told of the damage after I returned to the store , it's only human that after that information I took a very close look at the TV and found multiple, not mentioned faults.

The scratch is more prominent when the screen is turned on, but regardless the point is mute as I was informed by the salesman that only the table stand was missing and nothing else was wrong. It's my problem, but not my fault.

If I had damaged the screen myself and would 'tell porkies' I would just claim on insurance. I have a like for like and old for new policy and would easily get a new TV but I'm not like that ....

Caz3121

mousemart wrote: »

The display was released in Dec 2015 and the software supports it so that makes it what 2 or three years old in four weeks?

In December 2017 it will be 2 years old so it was 1 year and x months when purchased

photome

mousemart wrote: »

I know your playing devils advocate here but it raises a good question, retailers are not allowed to 'discount a discount' say the TV was £1000 - and they reduced it to 750 - 25% off if it does not sell they are then not allowed to discount it to 500 and say 50% off

The discount has to be from that LAST price it was up for so it would still be 25% off @ 500 pound...

I was only told of the damage after I returned to the store , it's only human that after that information I took a very close look at the TV and found multiple, not mentioned faults.

The scratch is more prominent when the screen is turned on, but regardless the point is mute as I was informed by the salesman that only the table stand was missing and nothing else was wrong. It's my problem, but not my fault.

If I had damaged the screen myself and would 'tell porkies' I would just claim on insurance. I have a like for like and old for new policy and would easily get a new TV but I'm not like that ....

Not sure that is right

Boots do it every year in their jan sale

starting at 50% and eventually getting to 90% off

in your analagy that Tv that started at £1000 and was 25% off to £750.
then it is reduced again to £500 it is surely 50% off the original selling price, it isnt still 25% off, that doesnt make sense (25% of 750 is 187.5 so it wouldnt even get to 500)

I think you should talk to the store see what they offer and then come back and possibly say.."what a great retailer, they did this for me," or take the refund

MobileSaver

mousemart wrote: »

would still leave me out of pocket for the wall mount and works to said wall.

You still need a TV and practically every TV in the UK uses a standard VESA mount so I cannot see how you will be out of pocket?

mousemart wrote: »

The more I think about it, the more I think that small claims would be the answer.

Small claims for what? Have they refused to refund you for the TV?

[Deleted User]

mousemart wrote: »

retailers are not allowed to 'discount a discount' say the TV was £1000 - and they reduced it to 750 - 25% off if it does not sell they are then not allowed to discount it to 500 and say 50% off

I'm afraid you are completely wrong here. Of course they can state that £500 is 50% off the original price and it would perfectly legal (and honest) for them to do so.

If you are seriously considering court action over this, you need to be very sure of your facts.

mousemart wrote: »

I went into the store with a budget to buy a brand new TV, even with a full refund I would not be able to buy a TV to the spec I had anticipated as I've spent some of the budget with a wall mount and works. This obviously causes me an inconvenience caused in part by the retailer. due to whats said above.

Flawed logic again. Any new TV you purchased would also need a wall mount.

Manxman_in_exile

Caz3121 wrote: »

In December 2017 it will be 2 years old so it was 1 year and x months when purchased

Yeah - I was a bit worried OP couldn't work out the age of the model.

Manxman_in_exile

Is it the case that all new TVs would "need" a wall mount?


I hate wall mounts as it tends to mean you have(?) to look up at the screen.

stuartJo1989

Come back on here once you have an offer of resolution (or not) from the retailer.