Right to repair washing machine under warranty

Goodjob

I have a John Lewis washing machine that has a 3yr Warranty and is just under two years old. It  stopped working and we arranged for a callout. Engineer visited and said parts would need to be ordered. A second engineer came out today and said that the first engineer had misdiagnosed the problem and the machine needs a new motor. 
So in summary we have given John Lewis two attempts to effect a repair. They have offered us a further visit on 29th dec to replace the motor which means that we will have been without a washing machine for over a month and we are a family of 4.
My position it to refuse the motor replacement and request that they immediately replace the faulty machine. Is consumer law on my side?
Thanks

KatrinaWaves

I doubt this would meet the requirements to have an attempt at a repair. No repair has been attempted. What does your warranty say about repair attempts etc, as if you are having it repaired under warranty then you are not currently claiming under consumer laws (which wouldn’t entitle you to an immediate replacement for what it’s worth...) 

Aylesbury_Duck

As above.  Consumer law is on your side but to exercise it you'll need to have a report that shows the problem is an inherent one,  and that will probably take just as long as the repair under warranty.  Since you've elected to go down the warranty route, I'd stick with that.  What does the warranty say about when they'd replace the machine?

theonlywayisup

As per the two posts above.

The warranty and your consumer rights are entirely different.  Your title refers to warranty and the post to consumer rights. 

The warranty is usually with the manufacturer and can have whatever terms & conditions it wants and those very T&C are what you need to refer to when wanting to check what you are 'entitled' to.  

Your consumer rights are not part of the warranty and as such because you have had the machine more than 6 months, you will need to show the fault is inherent.  

Yes, you have consumer rights but you also have to abide by them to have 'consumer law' on your side. 

Goodjob

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

theonlywayisup

Goodjob said:

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

It may not seem reasonable to you but if they are abiding by the t&c of the warranty then they are doing what they should.

As for where you stand legally, that has been explained, twice.

As the item is over 6 months old, the onus is on you to prove any fault was inherent.  You will need to commission a report.  The cost of the report will depend on the findings within it, if it is inherent the cost should be paid by the retailer, if not, then it is down to you.

If the outcome is that the fault was inherent then you present this to the retailer.  

Ectophile

theonlywayisup said:

Goodjob said:

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

It may not seem reasonable to you but if they are abiding by the t&c of the warranty then they are doing what they should.

As for where you stand legally, that has been explained, twice.

As the item is over 6 months old, the onus is on you to prove any fault was inherent.  You will need to commission a report.  The cost of the report will depend on the findings within it, if it is inherent the cost should be paid by the retailer, if not, then it is down to you.

If the outcome is that the fault was inherent then you present this to the retailer.  

But even with the report, the retailer can still choose to do a repair if that's more cost-effective than offering a replacement.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

theonlywayisup said:

Goodjob said:

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

It may not seem reasonable to you but if they are abiding by the t&c of the warranty then they are doing what they should.

As for where you stand legally, that has been explained, twice.

As the item is over 6 months old, the onus is on you to prove any fault was inherent.  You will need to commission a report.  The cost of the report will depend on the findings within it, if it is inherent the cost should be paid by the retailer, if not, then it is down to you.

If the outcome is that the fault was inherent then you present this to the retailer.  

As an engineer has attended and confirmed the motor is knackered and assuming that's been recorded somewhere the OP can access, that should be viewed as enough to demonstrate the goods didn't conform to the contract in terms of durability. 

I don't think the OP would need to commission a report a this instance. 

KatrinaWaves

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

theonlywayisup said:

Goodjob said:

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

It may not seem reasonable to you but if they are abiding by the t&c of the warranty then they are doing what they should.

As for where you stand legally, that has been explained, twice.

As the item is over 6 months old, the onus is on you to prove any fault was inherent.  You will need to commission a report.  The cost of the report will depend on the findings within it, if it is inherent the cost should be paid by the retailer, if not, then it is down to you.

If the outcome is that the fault was inherent then you present this to the retailer.  

As an engineer has attended and confirmed the motor is knackered and assuming that's been recorded somewhere the OP can access, that should be viewed as enough to demonstrate the goods didn't conform to the contract in terms of durability. 

I don't think the OP would need to commission a report a this instance. 

A report for a warranty repair is different, as the warranty may cover things that a CR claim wouldnt. Something being nackered does not always equal it being an inherent fault, and warranties are normally 'over and above' consumer rights.

There is no 'conforming to contract in terms of durability' element. It was either 'bound to fail' from the start, or it has become faulty. If it wasnt inherently faulty, then the CR offer no protection.

At this point I see no point in invoking consumer rights. They have a valid warranty and it is being sorted under that, albeit not in the time scales the OP wants.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

KatrinaWaves said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

theonlywayisup said:

Goodjob said:

The John Lewis web site states

All large appliances have a 2-year guarantee at no extra cost. Large electrical appliances include the following ranges of products: washing machines, tumble dryers, washer dryers, dishwashers, fridges, freezers, fridge freezers and cookers (excludes microwaves). John Lewis & Partners own brand large appliances include a 3-year guarantee at no extra cost.

Claiming on your guarantee

If your product develops a fault:

Blah blah

If we can't repair your item, we'll replace it with an item of equivalent specification. If no equivalent product is available, we'll either offer you the nearest equivalent specification or its selling price value , and we'll always do our best to make sure you're satisfied with the outcome

No Statement is made on limiting the number of repair attempts or the period of time over which those repair attempts can be made. However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to be without a washing machine for 6 weeks (assuming they fix it at the third attempt) and have multiple attempts at doing so. I'm still confused as to where I legally stand.

It may not seem reasonable to you but if they are abiding by the t&c of the warranty then they are doing what they should.

As for where you stand legally, that has been explained, twice.

As the item is over 6 months old, the onus is on you to prove any fault was inherent.  You will need to commission a report.  The cost of the report will depend on the findings within it, if it is inherent the cost should be paid by the retailer, if not, then it is down to you.

If the outcome is that the fault was inherent then you present this to the retailer.  

As an engineer has attended and confirmed the motor is knackered and assuming that's been recorded somewhere the OP can access, that should be viewed as enough to demonstrate the goods didn't conform to the contract in terms of durability. 

I don't think the OP would need to commission a report a this instance. 

A report for a warranty repair is different, as the warranty may cover things that a CR claim wouldnt. Something being nackered does not always equal it being an inherent fault, and warranties are normally 'over and above' consumer rights.

There is no 'conforming to contract in terms of durability' element. It was either 'bound to fail' from the start, or it has become faulty. If it wasnt inherently faulty, then the CR offer no protection.

At this point I see no point in invoking consumer rights. They have a valid warranty and it is being sorted under that, albeit not in the time scales the OP wants.

Goods are required to be of satisfactory quality and part of that is durability:

(1)Every contract to supply goods is to be treated as including a term that the quality of the goods is satisfactory.

(3)The quality of goods includes their state and condition; and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied;

(b)appearance and finish;

(c)freedom from minor defects;

(d)safety;

(e)durability.

If an internal component that the user can not access or interact with fails then the goods were not durable (which is basically bound to fail from the start) regardless of when they failed, unless it was outside their expected lifespan or caused by misuse. 

The term inherent is poor (and doesn't appear in the CRA) as is the use of the word fault as the act deals with goods not conforming to the contract. Whilst it is roundabout the same thing, as I posted recently on another thread, those two words may lead someone to assume they mean something other than they should and think they have less protection than they do. 

Whilst the report for the warranty claim may cover additional aspects the CRA may not, how is the OP going to damage the motor? Even if the suggestion of overloading was presented how would that be demonstrated? I can't see the terms of the warranty OP has but I'd bet they they don't cover user damage otherwise you could put a brick in your washing machine to get a new one after a few years. 

Also JL are not going spend time and money defending a small claim over a washing machine that has failed (unless they had something to demonstrate the issue is down to the customer misusing the goods).

I do agree there's no point going down a consumer rights avenue in this instance as the warranty appears more generous than the CRA may offer.