Advice on Consumer rights re. fridge freezer

Lovebeingathomemum

Good Afternoon,

I would like some advice on the below. I have scoured this site and others and think I have the basics covered but really looking for someone to confirm so I can go pre-armed.

Our integrated fridge-freezer, bought directly through the kitchen company 18 mths ago, broke down yesterday. We dug out the leaflets that were given to us by the fitters and realised we had not sent the warranty off that would cover us for two & five years. After further research though, I believe this does not affect our statutory rights.

I was all set to ring the manufacturer tomorrow, however, again after further research, I am now thinking it is the retailer who I need to begin with.

I rang the retailer, who was quite rude and tried to shoot me down implying that I didn't have a leg to stand on as I hadn't filled out the registration leaflet. He also denied responsibility telling me to go to the manufacturer, which I expected. Furthermore, he said 'no one goes back to the retailer after 28 days'.

I feel a little confused in my research with references to SOGA and CRA and EU directives.

I have no problem going back to the retailer and stating my case but I want to make certain, I am armed with the correct, relevant, and current legislation.

The route I will probably take - if I understand all I have read correctly - is that the appliance should have lasted for longer than 18 months.

Any advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks
Lianne

marliepanda

SOGA has been superseded by the CCRs though the protection is largely the same. Ignore the EU directive as our protection fees 6 years, not 2.

You didn’t set up the warranty so you don’t have that (necessarily anyway.)

All goods are protected from inherent faults for 6 years. Not faults, or damage, but inherent faults. This is not a 6 year guarantee by any means.

The retailer after 6 months can require you to get a report that states that the fridge freezer was bound to fail from purchase. The manufacturer doesn’t need to do anything for you as you didn’t set up their warranty.

If the fridge isn’t inherently faulty, or you don’t get a report from an independent engineer that proves it (bad wiring, part fitted incorrectly) then you are out of luck.

(Engineers reports aren’t usually free but if it proves an inherent fault the retailer must reimburse you for the report as well as offer you a repair, refund or replacement, their choice)

Lovebeingathomemum

Thanks for your reply.

So just so I'm clear the fact that a £600 appliance broke down with 18 months it not at all relevant if the fault wasn't inherent?

I would think it falls into the category that something should function correctly for a reasonable amount of time - of which, I would argue, 18 months is not.

k3lvc

Lovebeingathomemum wrote: »

Thanks for your reply.

So just so I'm clear the fact that a £600 appliance broke down with 18 months it not at all relevant if the fault wasn't inherent?

I would think it falls into the category that something should function correctly for a reasonable amount of time - of which, I would argue, 18 months is not.

That's correct - your expectations may be reasonable but they won't give you a leg to stand on in law

KeithP

Lovebeingathomemum, as part of your research, did you discover MSE's Consumer Rights guide?

Here's just one short extract that may help you:

Know who's responsible

When returning items, beware shops trying the oldest trick in the book: saying they're not responsible for the shoddy goods and you must call the manufacturer. This is total nonsense!

If a company fobs you off by saying "go to the maker instead", it's wrong. It's the retailer's job to sort it.

It doesn't matter if it's an iPod from a high street shop or a designer frock from a department store. If something's broken, torn, ripped or faulty, the seller has a legal duty to put it right as your contract is with it.

unholyangel

Lovebeingathomemum wrote: »

Thanks for your reply.

So just so I'm clear the fact that a £600 appliance broke down with 18 months it not at all relevant if the fault wasn't inherent?

I would think it falls into the category that something should function correctly for a reasonable amount of time - of which, I would argue, 18 months is not.

Simply, the CRA does not give you rights if goods are faulty. It only gives you rights if the goods fail to conform to contract (ie they are inherently faulty, misdescribed or not fit for purpose).

If you throw a dvd player down a flight of stairs its very likely to end up faulty, but you wouldn't be entitled to any remedy under the CRA because the goods didn't fail to conform to contract.

SouthUKMan

Forget the manufacturer warranty - that is a red herring.

Your contract is with the retailer. Final. As has already been pointed out, many retailers either through 'trying it on' or ignorance will tell you that there is "nothing we can do as the warranty has expired" or tell you to deal with the manufacturer direct. Retailers that tell you this are wrong on both counts and are simply trying to dodge their legal responsibility knowing that most consumers don't know their rights.

Consumer law states something like, goods have to be: 1) as described, 2) fit for purpose, and 3)... and this is the crucial bit for you... of satisfactory quality for the price paid.

This is how it works in practice. I would say it is reasonable to expect the average fridge - freezer to last five years. However, we do have to take the price paid into account. So, let's say you bought a bargain brand el cheapo model for £179. It is it probably reasonable to expect that cheap model to last at least three years. If you paid £600 then it is probably reasonable to expect that mid-range model to last five years. If you paid £995 then it is probably reasonable to expect that top of the range model to last a minimum of six years. Those are my guestimates - but the principle is correct.

So, is it reasonable for a £600 fridge - freezer to last 18 months? No, absolutely not. Does the retailer have a legal obligation to you? Yes, they absolutely do.

You are not entitled to a full refund or a replacement fridge - freezer, as the law takes into account the 18 months of usage that you've already had. However, you should be entitled to a repair, a part refund or a contribution to a replacement model. Based on my guestimation, you've already benefited from roughly a third of the appliance's expected life - therefore recompense in the region of two thirds of the price paid would be about right in my humble opinion.

unholyangel

SouthUKMan wrote: »

You are not entitled to a full refund or a replacement fridge - freezer, as the law takes into account the 18 months of usage that you've already had. However, you should be entitled to a repair, a part refund or a contribution to a replacement model. Based on my guestimation, you've already benefited from roughly a third of the appliance's expected life - therefore recompense in the region of two thirds of the price paid would be about right in my humble opinion.

I think you're slightly confused.

The consumer is entitled to request either a repair or a replacement. The retailer can refuse if the consumers choice is impossible or disproportionately costly in comparison to the other of those remedies.

Any repair/replacement must be carried out within reasonable time, without causing significant inconvenience and the retailer must bear any necessary costs involved.

bris

KeithP wrote: »

Lovebeingathomemum, as part of your research, did you discover MSE's Consumer Rights guide?

Here's just one short extract that may help you:

This is completely irrelevant at this stage, the retailer is well within their rights to refuse to help.


At this stage it's up to the OP to make the retailer help, until they do this the retailer doesn't have to do anything.

Lovebeingathomemum

SouthUKMan wrote: »

Forget the manufacturer warranty - that is a red herring.

Your contract is with the retailer. Final. As has already been pointed out, many retailers either through 'trying it on' or ignorance will tell you that there is "nothing we can do as the warranty has expired" or tell you to deal with the manufacturer direct. Retailers that tell you this are wrong on both counts and are simply trying to dodge their legal responsibility knowing that most consumers don't know their rights.

Consumer law states something like, goods have to be: 1) as described, 2) fit for purpose, and 3)... and this is the crucial bit for you... of satisfactory quality for the price paid.

This is how it works in practice. I would say it is reasonable to expect the average fridge - freezer to last five years. However, we do have to take the price paid into account. So, let's say you bought a bargain brand el cheapo model for £179. It is it probably reasonable to expect that cheap model to last at least three years. If you paid £600 then it is probably reasonable to expect that mid-range model to last five years. If you paid £995 then it is probably reasonable to expect that top of the range model to last a minimum of six years. Those are my guestimates - but the principle is correct.

So, is it reasonable for a £600 fridge - freezer to last 18 months? No, absolutely not. Does the retailer have a legal obligation to you? Yes, they absolutely do.

You are not entitled to a full refund or a replacement fridge - freezer, as the law takes into account the 18 months of usage that you've already had. However, you should be entitled to a repair, a part refund or a contribution to a replacement model. Based on my guestimation, you've already benefited from roughly a third of the appliance's expected life - therefore recompense in the region of two thirds of the price paid would be about right in my humble opinion.

Thank you SouthUKMan, this is exactly the kind of guidance I was looking for to support my argument to the retailer. There is no way I could accept that a consumer would not be protected in this situation - ie. a £600 appliance breaking after 18months - without putting up a fight first. Much appreciated!

shaun_from_Africa

Lovebeingathomemum wrote: »

Thank you SouthUKMan, this is exactly the kind of guidance I was looking for to support my argument to the retailer. There is no way I could accept that a consumer would not be protected in this situation - ie. a £600 appliance breaking after 18months - without putting up a fight first. Much appreciated!

It doesn't matter how protected you think you should be, it's a fact of law that it is your responsibility to prove that the fault is in all likelihood due to a manufacturing defect.
Without this proof, the retailer doesn't have to do anything at all.