John Lewis TV guarantee

neverthesamedaytwice

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

screech_78

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

neverthesamedaytwice

screech_78 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

y3sitsm3

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

Nothing.

Your consumer rights wouldn't entitle you to a better TV and JL's offer of a refund minus £200 would certainly be seen as fair as far as your consumer rights go.

The brand does not form part of the specification.  JL are completely in the right.

neverthesamedaytwice

y3sitsm3 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:so

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

Nothing.

Your consumer rights wouldn't entitle you to a better TV and JL's offer of a refund minus £200 would certainly be seen as fair as far as your consumer rights go.

The brand does not form part of the specification.  JL are completely in the right.

So I am not entitled to receive the TV back?

neverthesamedaytwice

Also, the specification of the original TV hasn't fully been met anyway. The soundbar is missing from the LG.

Gavin83

neverthesamedaytwice said:

y3sitsm3 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:so

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

Nothing.

Your consumer rights wouldn't entitle you to a better TV and JL's offer of a refund minus £200 would certainly be seen as fair as far as your consumer rights go.

The brand does not form part of the specification.  JL are completely in the right.

So I am not entitled to receive the TV back?

How do you propose that happens if they’ve disposed of it?

neverthesamedaytwice

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

y3sitsm3 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:so

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

Nothing.

Your consumer rights wouldn't entitle you to a better TV and JL's offer of a refund minus £200 would certainly be seen as fair as far as your consumer rights go.

The brand does not form part of the specification.  JL are completely in the right.

So I am not entitled to receive the TV back?

How do you propose that happens if they’ve disposed of it?

I don't think this is strictly my problem.

screech_78

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

screech_78 said:

Gavin83 said:

neverthesamedaytwice said:

All good points, thanks, I'll see what JL says.

I'm a bit concerned that JL has gone and disposed of the TV without informing me.

Do I not technically still own the TV?

Probably and they shouldn’t have disposed of it. However you need to ask yourself what the resolution would be. It would be to supply you with a similar spec replacement so you’re just going round in circles. If you pushed this and they refunded you I expect it would fall outside of their guarantee and they’d be able to reduce the refund for usage. Why would you have wanted a broken TV back anyway?

I’m wondering this too. My view is that OP didn’t want a broken TV back but they’re trying to use JL disposing of it as leverage to get what they want. The result would be the same, replacement or refund in the absence of repair so I don’t really see the issue. 

When faced with an offer I'm unhappy with, I'm pretty sure I need the option of being able to say no.

If I did say no, I would assume I'd get the TV back. Otherwise I'm left with nothing.

Without this option, I'm effectively being held over a barrel.

But what would you do with it? Repairing it at an independent would cost you money. You would be in an even worse position than you are now so I just don’t get the argument. 

Look at it from another point of view.

If I decide I'm not happy with the offer, what should happen next from a legal standpoint?

Legally, you’re entitled to a replacement or a refund (minus usage). The TV’s you seem to be arguing over don’t come with a sound bar either yet you seem to keep fixating on this. 

neverthesamedaytwice

screech_78 said:

Legally, you’re entitled to a replacement or a refund (minus usage). The TV’s you seem to be arguing over don’t come with a sound bar either yet you seem to keep fixating on this. 

All of these discussions have been very useful thanks

In an ideal world I'd still have the TV I bought. As tragic as it sounds, I spent months deliberating over this purchase.

The TV developed a fault on Christmas eve, which has been unfortunate. As @neilmcl states, the TV I bought was an outgoing model; this was possible because I bought it in June during the range switch over. Perhaps if the TV had decided to malfunction in June, I'd be able to get the outgoing model as a replacement too .. unfortunately I haven't had control over this.

As a consumer, I'm annoyed that a product costing me over £1200 hasn't even lasted two years. I'm also annoyed that John Lewis hasn't met the high standards many people associate with them.

I honestly don't want a 'better TV'. I just want choice over the TV I have in my living room. I originally chose a Panasonic TV, and I'd like the replacement to be a Panasonic too.

There's been a high degree of inconvenience with this whole process; phone calls, waiting in for repair appointments, emails .. and of course, no TV. To think that I'll also need to shell out even more money to get back to the place I was in (Panasonic TV in my living room) .. makes me feel even more annoyed.