John Lewis claim for TV, using Consumer Rights Act 2015 13 November 2022 at 6:50PM in Consumer rights 32 replies 2K views

mattyprice4004

In my experience JL will definitely need the report, and while Samsung often appear helpful on the surface once it appears there's no money in it for them they'll lose interest. 
You'll need to fund the report, and given the likely small return I honestly would consider if it's worth it. 
I'm a man of principles and I've found hard for just a few quid in the past - but the risk of zero return or even overall net outlay would put this one to bed for me. 

Gavin83

mikrt said:

Thanks all for your comments.

I have heard back from JL, and as some have said, they're asking for a confirmation from Samsung that it is an inherent fault - I can't see Samsung agreeing to that in a hurry. But I'm checking with cab if I have to use Samsung or whether I can use an independent. As I see it, it's obviously the screen - what else could it be. But I get it that I need to prove it.

But I have contacted Samsung who have said they'll help me. But I'm really expecting them to tell me to contact an engineer...... At my own expense.

My sister has paperwork from the engineer JL authorised to repair hers, and her customer/order number.

Thanks again 👌

You don't have to use Samsung. It just needs to be someone suitably qualified to diagnose the issue.

DullGreyGuy

Gavin83 said:

mikrt said:

Thanks all for your comments.

I have heard back from JL, and as some have said, they're asking for a confirmation from Samsung that it is an inherent fault - I can't see Samsung agreeing to that in a hurry. But I'm checking with cab if I have to use Samsung or whether I can use an independent. As I see it, it's obviously the screen - what else could it be. But I get it that I need to prove it.

But I have contacted Samsung who have said they'll help me. But I'm really expecting them to tell me to contact an engineer...... At my own expense.

My sister has paperwork from the engineer JL authorised to repair hers, and her customer/order number.

Thanks again 👌

You don't have to use Samsung. It just needs to be someone suitably qualified to diagnose the issue.

And more explicitly, the cause of the issue and its reasonableness in a device of this age... any appliance repair person can tell you the logic board needs replacing to fix the problem and give you a quote for doing so but many wont want to write a report on why the logic board failed or if its reasonable for it to fail in 5 years (assuming not caused by user error, power surge etc)

arthurfowler

Alderbank said:

diystarter7 said:

This consumer rights act 2015. Has anyone ever made a claim and got the item repaired places after the initial one yr guarantee, please? IMO, if this consumer protection thing was worth the paper it was written on, millions like me and others would not be paying for extended warranties.

Your statutory rights under CRA2015 are separate from and different to whatever rights you have under a warranty. Your rights under a warranty are exactly what it says in the warranty. Your rights under CRA are laid down in law and cannot be taken away.
Sometimes a warranty will give you additional benefits above your statutory rights. Richer Sounds 6 year TV warranty, for instance, is very good. Some warranties don't give you any more than your statutory rights.

I don't think the poster was disputing that. They were asking whether consumer rights are actually very helpful in such claims. 

Rights cannot be taken away but they can be VERY difficult to get a retailer to comply. 

brianposter

Your sisters bill for repairing a similar problem may well be as convincing as an technicians report. I would certainly try using that as an argument before paying for a report which may, or may not, be helpful.

DullGreyGuy

arthurfowler said:

Rights cannot be taken away but they can be VERY difficult to get a retailer to comply. 

Rights certainly can be taken away, wouldnt have prisons otherwise. 

Even some statutory rights can be waived in certain circumstances, the right to a cooling off period for services bought remotely are forfeit if the consumer requests the services commence before the end of the cooling off period.

Most CRA rights cannot we waived/taken away... getting a retailer to honour them can be more difficult

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

DullGreyGuy said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:
Although I'm sure there could be a 14 page thread on whether giving a screen life but using components that affect the screen and fail before the stated life of the panel is reasonable.... 

If you are taking about marketing campaign based on a components lifespan whilst knowing the overall unit will fail 

That was point being made, I don't think they would deliberately make the connected components fail before the screen life expired but should it have happened the manner in which the goods were marketed could be called in to question and used in the consumer's favour.

DullGreyGuy said:

Gavin83 said:

mikrt said:

Thanks all for your comments.

I have heard back from JL, and as some have said, they're asking for a confirmation from Samsung that it is an inherent fault - I can't see Samsung agreeing to that in a hurry. But I'm checking with cab if I have to use Samsung or whether I can use an independent. As I see it, it's obviously the screen - what else could it be. But I get it that I need to prove it.

But I have contacted Samsung who have said they'll help me. But I'm really expecting them to tell me to contact an engineer...... At my own expense.

My sister has paperwork from the engineer JL authorised to repair hers, and her customer/order number.

Thanks again 👌

You don't have to use Samsung. It just needs to be someone suitably qualified to diagnose the issue.

And more explicitly, the cause of the issue and its reasonableness in a device of this age... any appliance repair person can tell you the logic board needs replacing to fix the problem and give you a quote for doing so but many wont want to write a report on why the logic board failed or if its reasonable for it to fail in 5 years (assuming not caused by user error, power surge etc)

I don't see that any inspection needs to clarify why a component has failed but rather to rule out anything that on the balance of probability would have been user error/misuse. I suspect TVs may be subject to dust, moisture, excessive heat, physical impact but presumably there would be some signs of such things? 

DullGreyGuy said:

arthurfowler said:

Rights cannot be taken away but they can be VERY difficult to get a retailer to comply. 

Even some statutory rights can be waived in certain circumstances, the right to a cooling off period for services bought remotely are forfeit if the consumer requests the services commence before the end of the cooling off period.

The right to cancel during the cancellation period still exists but the consumer has to pay for any service already received (with one exception) 

Once the service is completed in full then the right to cancel ceases for obvious reasons  

mikrt

For all those who helped in commenting.... I decided not to bother.
Found a bargain online for a 65" (yes, another Samsung). And sold mine on Gumtree for just over £100.
I intend selling my new one @ 4.5 years old while still (hopefully) on good order.
Thank you

mikrt

mikrt said:

For all those who helped in commenting.... I decided not to bother.
Found a bargain online for a 65" (yes, another Samsung). And sold mine on Gumtree for just over £100.
I intend selling my new one @ 4.5 years old while still (hopefully) on good order.
Thank you

In case anybody is wondering, I used quidco and got 12% cash-back (not including VAT) (confirmed tracked) through 1st order on very.co.uk , very were (still are?) Doing a 20% cash back on a 12 months buy now pay later (email confirmed successful) due back 5th January. When I'll pay it in one go and probably close the account.
 
Paying £489.30 for a £699 tv (BU8500 65")

powerful_Rogue

A wise choice. Sometimes it's worth picking your battles!

Hope you enjoy your new TV!