Currys/Samsung £100 cashback

Liz1961

Hi, 
Can anyone offer advise, please. 

I purchased a Samsung TV on 24th October 2023 (the last day of a £100 cashback offer)
I followed the cashback instructions which were to apply after 30 days and received approval on the Samsung tracker system on 1st December. It stated that my cash should be with no later than 30 days from this approval (therefore 31st December 2023 at the latest). On 3rd January 2024, we visited the store we had purchased from and asked where our cashback was. The response from Currys was, ‘it’s nothing to do with us, it’s Samsung). Who is our contract with? I’ve chased both Currys and Samsung but I’m not getting anywhere. 

Any advice gratefully received. 

BoGoF

It was a Samsung promotion and you made your claim to Samsung so.........

PHK

This was a Samsung promotion. You'd need to contact the promoter given in the instructions. 

RefluentBeans

Your sale contract is with Curry’s (and your consumer rights with the product) but your cash back contract is with whoever offered the cash back which I assume is Samsung (or a Samsung affiliate offering the cash back). 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

RefluentBeans

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

RefluentBeans said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

If it's on the product box only perhaps. If it's on the shelf, posters, flyers, etc in store or mentioned on the website beyond a stock image of the product box then it's part of Currys advertising which falls under the CPRs. 

screech_78

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

RefluentBeans said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

If it's on the product box only perhaps. If it's on the shelf, posters, flyers, etc in store or mentioned on the website beyond a stock image of the product box then it's part of Currys advertising which falls under the CPRs. 

I agree. Although a promotion by the supplier, if advertised by the retailer it forms part of the contract. 

We had a case similar go to small claims (also a Samsung promotion). I can’t remember the exact details of why Samsung didn’t honour the claim, however we were ordered to pay the cashback amount as we were advertising on behalf of Samsung.  

ThumbRemote

RefluentBeans said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

Because it's a 'feature' of the product. The retailer is always responsible, even if it was advertised by the manufacturer. 

It's exactly the same as if you bought a TV that the manufacturer advertises as 4K, but only supports HD. Not the retailers advertising, but still the retailers responsibility. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

screech_78 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

RefluentBeans said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

If it's on the product box only perhaps. If it's on the shelf, posters, flyers, etc in store or mentioned on the website beyond a stock image of the product box then it's part of Currys advertising which falls under the CPRs. 

I agree. Although a promotion by the supplier, if advertised by the retailer it forms part of the contract. 

We had a case similar go to small claims (also a Samsung promotion). I can’t remember the exact details of why Samsung didn’t honour the claim, however we were ordered to pay the cashback amount as we were advertising on behalf of Samsung.  

Thanks Screech, it would be very interesting to be able to search small claims cases online to discover the reasoning behind decisions. 

ThumbRemote said:

Because it's a 'feature' of the product. The retailer is always responsible, even if it was advertised by the manufacturer. 

It's exactly the same as if you bought a TV that the manufacturer advertises as 4K, but only supports HD. Not the retailers advertising, but still the retailers responsibility. 

It's an interesting point, the regs do include any public statement made by the producer but it seems to only lend itself to the element of satisfactory quality, again it would be interesting to see how such a claim made by the likes of Samsung but not mentioned by Currys would come in to play. 

screech_78

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

screech_78 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

RefluentBeans said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Would be nice to see these cashback schemes tested, if Currys advertise the cashback to get a sale I don't see how they can claim it's nothing to do with them. 

Guess it depends how it’s advertised. If a sticker from the manufacturer can’t see how Curry’s could be held responsible at all. 

If it's on the product box only perhaps. If it's on the shelf, posters, flyers, etc in store or mentioned on the website beyond a stock image of the product box then it's part of Currys advertising which falls under the CPRs. 

I agree. Although a promotion by the supplier, if advertised by the retailer it forms part of the contract. 

We had a case similar go to small claims (also a Samsung promotion). I can’t remember the exact details of why Samsung didn’t honour the claim, however we were ordered to pay the cashback amount as we were advertising on behalf of Samsung.  

Thanks Screech, it would be very interesting to be able to search small claims cases online to discover the reasoning behind decisions. 

ThumbRemote said:

Because it's a 'feature' of the product. The retailer is always responsible, even if it was advertised by the manufacturer. 

It's exactly the same as if you bought a TV that the manufacturer advertises as 4K, but only supports HD. Not the retailers advertising, but still the retailers responsibility. 

It's an interesting point, the regs do include any public statement made by the producer but it seems to only lend itself to the element of satisfactory quality, again it would be interesting to see how such a claim made by the likes of Samsung but not mentioned by Currys would come in to play. 

Wouldn’t that be great if they could be searched! I’m sure this one was definitely a failure by Samsung. If it had been something like the customer hadn’t claimed in time, I don’t think it would have been successful.