Seeking Refund Advice from John Lewis

sheramber

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Emmia

ngc5195fly said:

flaneurs_lobster said:

ngc5195fly said:

MattMattMattUK said:

ngc5195fly said:

Keep_pedalling said:

You might like to look more closely at what your rights actually are.

https://www.prestonredman.co.uk/site/news/consumer-rights-act-2015

Thanks for the link — actually, it backs up my case. The fault appeared within six months, so it’s presumed to have been there at delivery, and John Lewis would need to prove otherwise.

Even though the 30-day “right to reject” has passed, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 still gives me the right to a refund, replacement, or repair. I’m opting for a refund, because a repair isn’t practical for daily use and the fault could happen again.

So, while I get the point of the link, it supports my position legally.

No it does not, it specifically states you must give them one chance to repair.

I get that a retailer can offer one repair or replacement within six months, but under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, I’m not obliged to accept a repair if it’s impractical. John Lewis have said a repair could take up to 28 working days, leaving me without my phone — which I use daily for essential tasks like banking — for nearly a month. That makes a repair impractical, so I am legally entitled to reject the device and request a refund.

Don't think it's impractical if they've offered you a loaner for the duration of the repair.

I get that, but a loan phone doesn’t make the situation practical. My phone isn’t just for calls — it’s tied to my banking apps, two-factor authentication, and personal data that can’t simply be transferred to a temporary device.

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, practicality is judged based on the individual circumstances of the consumer, not just whether a loaner is offered. So, for me, being without my own secured device — even with a loaner — is still impractical, which means I can legally refuse the repair and request a refund instead.

How do you know the loaner will only allow you to make and receive calls? You'd presumably log into your Google/apple account and your apps etc., would be there to use and download. Yes setting up another phone is a pain, but you're going to have to do it if you get a refund and buy another phone.

Personally in my eyes,  smartphones and similar devices with folding screens have a very obvious point of weakness /design flaw, so I'd never get one. Standard smartphones work very well.

sheramber

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

Then your post would be better in the Praise. Vent and Warning forum. 

MattMattMattUK

ngc5195fly said:

flaneurs_lobster said:

ngc5195fly said:

MattMattMattUK said:

ngc5195fly said:

Keep_pedalling said:

You might like to look more closely at what your rights actually are.

https://www.prestonredman.co.uk/site/news/consumer-rights-act-2015

Thanks for the link — actually, it backs up my case. The fault appeared within six months, so it’s presumed to have been there at delivery, and John Lewis would need to prove otherwise.

Even though the 30-day “right to reject” has passed, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 still gives me the right to a refund, replacement, or repair. I’m opting for a refund, because a repair isn’t practical for daily use and the fault could happen again.

So, while I get the point of the link, it supports my position legally.

No it does not, it specifically states you must give them one chance to repair.

I get that a retailer can offer one repair or replacement within six months, but under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, I’m not obliged to accept a repair if it’s impractical. John Lewis have said a repair could take up to 28 working days, leaving me without my phone — which I use daily for essential tasks like banking — for nearly a month. That makes a repair impractical, so I am legally entitled to reject the device and request a refund.

Don't think it's impractical if they've offered you a loaner for the duration of the repair.

I get that, but a loan phone doesn’t make the situation practical. My phone isn’t just for calls — it’s tied to my banking apps, two-factor authentication, and personal data that can’t simply be transferred to a temporary device.

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, practicality is judged based on the individual circumstances of the consumer, not just whether a loaner is offered. So, for me, being without my own secured device — even with a loaner — is still impractical, which means I can legally refuse the repair and request a refund instead.

It takes less than an hour on an Android phone, unless one has huge amounts of data stored in the device likely less than thirty minutes.

flaneurs_lobster

ngc5195fly said:

flaneurs_lobster said:

Don't think it's impractical if they've offered you a loaner for the duration of the repair.

I get that, but a loan phone doesn’t make the situation practical. My phone isn’t just for calls — it’s tied to my banking apps, two-factor authentication, and personal data that can’t simply be transferred to a temporary device.

Perfectly practical. I'm sure that you are a very busy person but cloning that phone onto a loaner would take an hour, tops.

You haven't mentioned a like-for-like replacement, would that not be acceptable?

And my suggestion of contacting Samsung Support?

powerful_Rogue

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

They are following the law. 

However you believe they are not because you don't believe upto 28 days is a reasonable timeframe. I would disagree with you on this.

So your only option is to send them a letter before action and take them to court for it to be decided. In which case you'll be without a working phone for probably upto six months.

flaneurs_lobster

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

They are following the law. 

However you believe they are not because you don't believe upto 28 days is a reasonable timeframe. I would disagree with you on this.

So your only option is to send them a letter before action and take them to court for it to be decided. In which case you'll be without a working phone for probably upto six months.

No suggestion that the phone is not working. Folding phones have a factory-fitted screen protector film applied, it's an essential part of the overall folding design since the screen by necessity is less robust than a conventional slab phone's "Gorilla Glass" or equiv. 

Not that unusual for there to be lifting or bubbling of this protector, Samsung will (according to the anecdotes I've seen online) replace without issue.

powerful_Rogue

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

They are following the law. 

However you believe they are not because you don't believe upto 28 days is a reasonable timeframe. I would disagree with you on this.

So your only option is to send them a letter before action and take them to court for it to be decided. In which case you'll be without a working phone for probably upto six months.

Oh sure, 28 working days without my own phone sounds completely fine — I’ve always wanted a month-long digital detox! 😉

Talk about exagerating. Also it's 'upto 28 days'.

powerful_Rogue

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

They are following the law. 

However you believe they are not because you don't believe upto 28 days is a reasonable timeframe. I would disagree with you on this.

So your only option is to send them a letter before action and take them to court for it to be decided. In which case you'll be without a working phone for probably upto six months.

Oh sure, 28 working days without my own phone sounds completely fine — I’ve always wanted a month-long digital detox! 😉

Talk about exagerating. Also it's 'upto 28 days'.

Wow — I see you’re a master of exaggeration. You’ve clearly met your match in someone who actually has a life and daily responsibilities, thanks!

Can't see the need for the rudeness just because you haven't got an answer that agrees with your opinion of the law.

MattMattMattUK

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

powerful_Rogue said:

ngc5195fly said:

sheramber said:

Then why are you posting on here if you ‘know’ your rights?

Because understanding the law doesn’t magically make retailers follow it. I’m posting to show how John Lewis are responding — not to get a lecture on basic consumer rights.

They are following the law. 

However you believe they are not because you don't believe upto 28 days is a reasonable timeframe. I would disagree with you on this.

So your only option is to send them a letter before action and take them to court for it to be decided. In which case you'll be without a working phone for probably upto six months.

Oh sure, 28 working days without my own phone sounds completely fine — I’ve always wanted a month-long digital detox! 😉

Talk about exagerating. Also it's 'upto 28 days'.

Wow — I see you’re a master of exaggeration. You’ve clearly met your match in someone who actually has a life and daily responsibilities, thanks!

Can't see the need for the rudeness just because you haven't got an answer that agrees with your opinion of the law.

I’m not being rude — I’m just pointing out that “up to 28 days” without my own phone isn’t practical for daily life, and that’s exactly what the law considers. It’s not my opinion; it’s about real-world application of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Let's leave it at that.

If you cannot see that your comment was rude I think there are bigger issues.