Curry's/Knowhow- who to sue?

[Deleted User]

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Do the terms and conditions say you are entitled to a new cooker or can request one. If the latter there is no legal entitlement

Yes, I'd like to read exactly what cover this "Plan" provides. Does it stipulate, for example, that it must be the same fault which has to be repeatedly repaired? Does it state that the cooker must be beyond repair before a new one is provided? If it was as straightforward as a set number of repairs equals a new cooker then I would have expected them to provide it without fuss or quibble by now.

Taking this company to court on the basis of what was apparently said on the telephone is very unwise in my opinion.

What exactly was the response to your formal written complaint, OP?

Cookie_Girl

This is the care plan bit we're talking about:

"Request a replacement - if your product goes wrong again after the 3rd repair, you can request a replacement."

So legally although it says I can request a replacement (which kind of implies that I'd get one) they can turn around and tell me to get lost? Really?

The response to my written complaint was that because I didn't ask for a replacement they can't give me one now that the cooker is working. The fact is that I asked for a replacement twice and was mislead by being told I'd be getting the repair anyway. It made some sense because why should I be inconvenienced by not having a working cooker while I wait for a voucher. That was the gist of what I was told on the phone. Great customer service, I thought.

[Deleted User]

Cookie_Girl wrote: »

Great customer service, I thought.

Hardly enough to go to court with I'm afraid.

Save your money, perhaps this current repair will be long lasting?

Cookie_Girl

Hahah, I'm not taking them to court for poor customer service. They acted dishonestly. Small claims is cheap enough and if I lose I lose, but maybe I'll get someone sensible looking at the case who'll agree that companies should be held accountable for deliberately misleading customers.

unholyangel

Cookie_Girl wrote: »

This is the care plan bit we're talking about:

"Request a replacement - if your product goes wrong again after the 3rd repair, you can request a replacement."

So legally although it says I can request a replacement (which kind of implies that I'd get one) they can turn around and tell me to get lost? Really?

The response to my written complaint was that because I didn't ask for a replacement they can't give me one now that the cooker is working. The fact is that I asked for a replacement twice and was mislead by being told I'd be getting the repair anyway. It made some sense because why should I be inconvenienced by not having a working cooker while I wait for a voucher. That was the gist of what I was told on the phone. Great customer service, I thought.

You missed the annotation.

2. You’ll be given a Currys PC World voucher to obtain a replacement product
and your Repair & Support Plan will end.

But nothing in that (or any of the plan T&C's I've read) implies they need to agree. Yes it says you can request a replacement, but it doesn't then go on to say "if we agree to replace, you'll be given...." and technically although you request a replacement, you'll never be given a replacement, only vouchers which you can put towards the cost of a new one.

Anyway, as I said, ombudsman is a risk free option.

Cookie_Girl

Ah, I get your point. The thing is that I was told about the vouchers and that was what I was expecting, so when I say 'new cooker' I don't mean I actually need them to give me a new cooker to be happy. The chap said I would get vouchers and I said fine, and that's what I communicated to the engineer. So the 'new cooker' in my posts is just shorthand. Vouchers, and I'd be getting a new cooker with them.

The problem is that they misled me into accepting a repair, which now means I can't have what I want, which is a new cooker (which I'd be buying with the vouchers I was told I'd get). Their staff know their system, I don't. If a staff member tells me that an engineer will come, do a repair, write up a report that it was yet another mechanical failure, and I'd get vouchers within 72 hours, that is what I expect should happen. If I further tell the engineer that I need a report to get the vouchers for a new cooker, she shouldn't proceed with a repair which she knows (or should know) will mean that I don't in fact get any vouchers.

I hope that makes more sense. Do people really think I'm being unreasonable, or that they acted correctly and have no further liability?

LadyDee

OP, I can sympathise, but your case will be much stronger IF/WHEN it goes wrong again. You can't really sue on the grounds of what MIGHT happen. If it doesn't go wrong again you've saved all the hassle of a small claim court for "lies". If it does go wrong then you can attempt to claim under the terms of your plan.

esuhl

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

My point is that it's current working status would severely weaken any court case.

How? It's a breach of contract. The OP requested a replacement voucher, which she was entitled to. It has not been received, therefore Curry's (or whoever) are in breach of contract.

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Do the terms and conditions say you are entitled to a new cooker or can request one. If the latter there is no legal entitlement

If that's the interpretation, I'd question whether that would be considered an "unfair term" in contract law.

The OP can "request" that Curry's provide her with a brand new Ferrari (or anything she chooses). Having such a term in a contract is meaningless unless it confers rights or obligations on a signatory.

Therefore, most people would reasonably see such a clause and believe that they were entitled to a replacement if they requested one. Inserting such nonsense clauses in a contract would, I believe, be deemed "misleading" by a court, leaving it to be interpreted in the OP's favour.

LadyDee wrote: »

If it doesn't go wrong again you've saved all the hassle of a small claim court for "lies".

What lies? Do you know something we don't?

---

Anyway, the FIRST thing you need to do, Cookie Girl, is to make a "subject access request" to get a copy of any phone recordings they hold. The GDPR regulations mean that companies can no longer charge you a fee (in most circumstances).


https://www.callcentrehelper.com/data-protection-act-and-call-recording-57146.htm



I don't know how long recordings are kept for, so probably a good idea to get in quick, then you can decide what to do at your leisure.

Cookie_Girl

Thank you esuhl.

I've emailed them about the subject access request. We'll see what, if anything, they cough up.

lincroft1710

esuhl wrote: »

If that's the interpretation, I'd question whether that would be considered an "unfair term" in contract law.

The OP can "request" that Curry's provide her with a brand new Ferrari (or anything she chooses). Having such a term in a contract is meaningless unless it confers rights or obligations on a signatory.

It's hardly an "unfair term"! Possibly misleading as it is not clear in that it does not state that it is an entitlement, if that is what is intended. It is possible the terms may have been drafted purposely so that they can be open to interpretation.

Of course a signatory can "request" something that is not in the contract. But there is no legal obligation for it be provided.

My interpretation is that after the 3rd repair the signatory can request a new cooker, but the repairer does not have to provide one if a successful repair can be effected.