Faulty TV kept for repairs for more than a month

HeinzVarieties

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The problem is that Argos has mislead your father about his consumer rights.

It doesn’t matter who the so called warranty is with, Argos have the contract and should sort out repairs or contact the manufacturer, as their agent to carry our repairs, on behalf on the customer.

If it has been less than 6 months (not sure what date in June) I’d go back to Argos for a full refund.

The repair time is excessive given the purchaser’s situation.

If it has just ticked over the 6 month mark Argos can impose a reduction. 

OP your father would be exercising his final right to reject as the goods did not conform to the contract and although a repair or replacement was requested the retailer has failed to do so within a reasonable time or without significant inconvenience. 

The 6 months will be from the time your father tells Argos he is exercising this right.

They will probably fob you off so it’s best to Google ‘CEO email’ and search that site for Argos and Sainsburys (who own Argos) and cc both those in as well as customer service. 

I’m on my phone so can’t quote the relevant bits but the final right to reject is detailed at the link.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/24/enacted

What about the OP's father's situation makes this unreasonable vs anyone else?  A TV is of equal value to everyone (i.e. purely entertainment and thus not very important)

Why should they refund over anyone else?

A reasonable time should surely take into account the current market conditions as well as the consumers needs, right?

Or is this one of these endless arguments where you don't think about things reasonably and draw everyone into another endless argument?

Manxman_in_exile

HeinzVarieties said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The problem is that Argos has mislead your father about his consumer rights.

It doesn’t matter who the so called warranty is with, Argos have the contract and should sort out repairs or contact the manufacturer, as their agent to carry our repairs, on behalf on the customer.

If it has been less than 6 months (not sure what date in June) I’d go back to Argos for a full refund.

The repair time is excessive given the purchaser’s situation.

If it has just ticked over the 6 month mark Argos can impose a reduction. 

OP your father would be exercising his final right to reject as the goods did not conform to the contract and although a repair or replacement was requested the retailer has failed to do so within a reasonable time or without significant inconvenience. 

The 6 months will be from the time your father tells Argos he is exercising this right.

They will probably fob you off so it’s best to Google ‘CEO email’ and search that site for Argos and Sainsburys (who own Argos) and cc both those in as well as customer service. 

I’m on my phone so can’t quote the relevant bits but the final right to reject is detailed at the link.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/24/enacted

What about the OP's father's situation makes this unreasonable vs anyone else?  A TV is of equal value to everyone (i.e. purely entertainment and thus not very important)

Why should they refund over anyone else?

A reasonable time should surely take into account the current market conditions as well as the consumers needs, right?

Or is this one of these endless arguments where you don't think about things reasonably and draw everyone into another endless argument?

I'd prefer to give the OP's father the benefit of the doubt.  We know he's elderly, but neither you nor I know if he's a healthy 80 year old or lives on his own or is a widower.

Perhaps the elderly father is housebound or has difficulty getting around outside the house and the TV is important to him as a source of news, connection with the world at large, and - well - just entertainment.  Just because you are fortunate enough to enjoy a life where TV is "only" a source of entertainment for you doesn't mean that everybody is as lucky as you. 

In any case, I don't see why "entertainment" is unimportant.  Six weeks is too long to wait for a TV repair.

HeinzVarieties

Manxman_in_exile said:

HeinzVarieties said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The problem is that Argos has mislead your father about his consumer rights.

It doesn’t matter who the so called warranty is with, Argos have the contract and should sort out repairs or contact the manufacturer, as their agent to carry our repairs, on behalf on the customer.

If it has been less than 6 months (not sure what date in June) I’d go back to Argos for a full refund.

The repair time is excessive given the purchaser’s situation.

If it has just ticked over the 6 month mark Argos can impose a reduction. 

OP your father would be exercising his final right to reject as the goods did not conform to the contract and although a repair or replacement was requested the retailer has failed to do so within a reasonable time or without significant inconvenience. 

The 6 months will be from the time your father tells Argos he is exercising this right.

They will probably fob you off so it’s best to Google ‘CEO email’ and search that site for Argos and Sainsburys (who own Argos) and cc both those in as well as customer service. 

I’m on my phone so can’t quote the relevant bits but the final right to reject is detailed at the link.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/24/enacted

What about the OP's father's situation makes this unreasonable vs anyone else?  A TV is of equal value to everyone (i.e. purely entertainment and thus not very important)

Why should they refund over anyone else?

A reasonable time should surely take into account the current market conditions as well as the consumers needs, right?

Or is this one of these endless arguments where you don't think about things reasonably and draw everyone into another endless argument?

I'd prefer to give the OP's father the benefit of the doubt.  We know he's elderly, but neither you nor I know if he's a healthy 80 year old or lives on his own or is a widower.

Perhaps the elderly father is housebound or has difficulty getting around outside the house and the TV is important to him as a source of news, connection with the world at large, and - well - just entertainment.  Just because you are fortunate enough to enjoy a life where TV is "only" a source of entertainment for you doesn't mean that everybody is as lucky as you. 

In any case, I don't see why "entertainment" is unimportant.  Six weeks is too long to wait for a TV repair.

The law does not state what being "excessive" is regarding to anyone as per their personal disabilities so why are you bringing it up unless you're want to wade into discrimination law?

Do you feel it is acceptable if a 5-year-old gets an immediate remedy because they're a child, or an 80-year-old because they're an old person?  Is that not the textbook definition of discrimination?

mobileron

The answer is never buy a tv from Argos and add Currys to the list.
Start looking at customer support on forums and they will tell who is best.
Sadly a bit late for your dad.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

HeinzVarieties said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

The problem is that Argos has mislead your father about his consumer rights.

It doesn’t matter who the so called warranty is with, Argos have the contract and should sort out repairs or contact the manufacturer, as their agent to carry our repairs, on behalf on the customer.

If it has been less than 6 months (not sure what date in June) I’d go back to Argos for a full refund.

The repair time is excessive given the purchaser’s situation.

If it has just ticked over the 6 month mark Argos can impose a reduction. 

OP your father would be exercising his final right to reject as the goods did not conform to the contract and although a repair or replacement was requested the retailer has failed to do so within a reasonable time or without significant inconvenience. 

The 6 months will be from the time your father tells Argos he is exercising this right.

They will probably fob you off so it’s best to Google ‘CEO email’ and search that site for Argos and Sainsburys (who own Argos) and cc both those in as well as customer service. 

I’m on my phone so can’t quote the relevant bits but the final right to reject is detailed at the link.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/24/enacted

What about the OP's father's situation makes this unreasonable vs anyone else?  A TV is of equal value to everyone (i.e. purely entertainment and thus not very important)

Why should they refund over anyone else?

A reasonable time should surely take into account the current market conditions as well as the consumers needs, right?

Or is this one of these endless arguments where you don't think about things reasonably and draw everyone into another endless argument?

Whilst market conditions may be of consideration the legislation has been written to allow the consumer seek an alternative remedy when the repair or replacement can not be performed within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience. 

I don't think 6 weeks is reasonable, particularly having been told the repair would take 2-3 days, your opinion may different and neither of our opinions matter really as ultimately what is reasonable would be decided on the balance of probability via the small claims process (which to be fair would most likely take longer than the repair). 

That doesn't prevent the purchaser from approaching the retailer to express their opinion of the time being unreasonable and request an alternative remedy. 

The situation isn't one of age or ability, simply that the purchaser has replaced the goods themselves implying the wait has been inconvenient enough for them to go such expense (again in their opinion).  

mattyprice4004

burningjane said:

6 weeks. OK well I guess we have different definitions of reasonable then you don't work for a TV company do you

Ding ding ding! 
No one can say anything remotely supportive of a company without this gem popping up - classic 

born_again

Manxman_in_exile said:

I would argue that Argos had their first (and last) attempt at repair when the OP's dad contacted them and they fobbed him off to LG.  (As somebody has already pointed out, if dad had insisted on Argos dealing with it, Argos would only have gone to LG themselves any way, so Argos have not been disadvantaged in any way by dad going to LG.  In any case, it was at Argos's suggestion)

FWIW, I think 6 weeks to be without the TV is definitely unreasonable - whether there is a current shortage of electronic components or not.  In fact that's all the more reason to go back to Argos, tell them that dad isn't satisifed with the time it's taking to get a repair done because the parts obviously aren't available, and to insist on a replacement or refund.

Would Argos do that when the TV is with LG being repaired?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

born_again said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

I would argue that Argos had their first (and last) attempt at repair when the OP's dad contacted them and they fobbed him off to LG.  (As somebody has already pointed out, if dad had insisted on Argos dealing with it, Argos would only have gone to LG themselves any way, so Argos have not been disadvantaged in any way by dad going to LG.  In any case, it was at Argos's suggestion)

FWIW, I think 6 weeks to be without the TV is definitely unreasonable - whether there is a current shortage of electronic components or not.  In fact that's all the more reason to go back to Argos, tell them that dad isn't satisifed with the time it's taking to get a repair done because the parts obviously aren't available, and to insist on a replacement or refund.

Would Argos do that when the TV is with LG being repaired?

(Assuming 6 weeks isn't a reasonable time), comply with their legal obligations without argument? Probably not.... 

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

born_again said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

I would argue that Argos had their first (and last) attempt at repair when the OP's dad contacted them and they fobbed him off to LG.  (As somebody has already pointed out, if dad had insisted on Argos dealing with it, Argos would only have gone to LG themselves any way, so Argos have not been disadvantaged in any way by dad going to LG.  In any case, it was at Argos's suggestion)

FWIW, I think 6 weeks to be without the TV is definitely unreasonable - whether there is a current shortage of electronic components or not.  In fact that's all the more reason to go back to Argos, tell them that dad isn't satisifed with the time it's taking to get a repair done because the parts obviously aren't available, and to insist on a replacement or refund.

Would Argos do that when the TV is with LG being repaired?

(Assuming 6 weeks isn't a reasonable time), comply with their legal obligations without argument? Probably not.... 

You think 6 weeks isn't reasonable, I do. Depends if the judge thinks like you or me. Plus I can't see Argos doing anything when the OP has accepted the repair remedy and has no TV to return to Argos for a refund.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

born_again said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

I would argue that Argos had their first (and last) attempt at repair when the OP's dad contacted them and they fobbed him off to LG.  (As somebody has already pointed out, if dad had insisted on Argos dealing with it, Argos would only have gone to LG themselves any way, so Argos have not been disadvantaged in any way by dad going to LG.  In any case, it was at Argos's suggestion)

FWIW, I think 6 weeks to be without the TV is definitely unreasonable - whether there is a current shortage of electronic components or not.  In fact that's all the more reason to go back to Argos, tell them that dad isn't satisifed with the time it's taking to get a repair done because the parts obviously aren't available, and to insist on a replacement or refund.

Would Argos do that when the TV is with LG being repaired?

(Assuming 6 weeks isn't a reasonable time), comply with their legal obligations without argument? Probably not.... 

You think 6 weeks isn't reasonable, I do. Depends if the judge thinks like you or me. Plus I can't see Argos doing anything when the OP has accepted the repair remedy and has no TV to return to Argos for a refund.

Out of interest how long is reasonable? 

The TV is with the 3rd party Argos told the purchaser to contact. 

If Argos were following the requirements of offering the consumer a repair effectively the TV is in their possession as it’s with their agent they use for repairs.