Samsung ignore consumer rights

Grumpy_chap

Jenkins86 said:

Just to clarify under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, for the first 6 months after delivery, the burden of proof lies with the retailer, not the consumer —whether it’s a fault or damage.

Section 19(14) says: “It is to be taken that the goods did not conform at the time of delivery, unless the trader can prove otherwise.”

The idea that damage is automatically treated differently isn’t supported in the legislation to my knowledge 

Well, the Samsung T's&C's say

4. If your Product(s) arrived damaged when it was delivered, you must notify us within 72 hours of the day you receive the Product(s). Any damage not reported will be determined to have been caused by your handling of the Product(s), unless it can be proven otherwise. We may reduce the full amount of your refund to reflect the reduction in the value of the Product(s) caused by the damage.


I think Samsung would rely on that failure to report damage for the proof of not damaged at delivery.

https://www.samsung.com/uk/estore/static/link-terms-and-conditions-of-sale/

Jenkins86

Grumpy_chap said:

Jenkins86 said:

Just to clarify under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, for the first 6 months after delivery, the burden of proof lies with the retailer, not the consumer —whether it’s a fault or damage.

Section 19(14) says: “It is to be taken that the goods did not conform at the time of delivery, unless the trader can prove otherwise.”

The idea that damage is automatically treated differently isn’t supported in the legislation to my knowledge 

Well, the Samsung T's&C's say

4. If your Product(s) arrived damaged when it was delivered, you must notify us within 72 hours of the day you receive the Product(s). Any damage not reported will be determined to have been caused by your handling of the Product(s), unless it can be proven otherwise. We may reduce the full amount of your refund to reflect the reduction in the value of the Product(s) caused by the damage.


I think Samsung would rely on that failure to report damage for the proof of not damaged at delivery.

https://www.samsung.com/uk/estore/static/link-terms-and-conditions-of-sale/

Yes I am aware of the T&C’s, however a companies T&C’s cannot override statutory rights under the consumer rights act. I’m not relying on good will or warranty, I’m going by my legal right to reject a faulty item within the first 6 months of owning it. This is all I need advice on, not the T&C ‘s but thank you for your time regardless. 

Jenkins86

ButterCheese said:

This sounds like a very bad state of affairs, I never ever buy direct from manufacturers as other outlets (like Amazon) have far better customer service provisions.  But you weren't to know that.  I would keep going with your complaint if you have the time and energy.  

There were a few things that you might have done differently though; always inspect and test something like that within the 10 day (or is it 14 day?) timeline, which makes things much easier.  Unfortunately for you, even if they were polite and helpful, lots of outlets would also query this because of the delay between delivery and your complaint.  Sadly lots of people break stuff and try to (later) blame it on the delivery in order to get money back.

I'm not in agreement with @c@caprikid1- the damage isn't even on the corner, and you also can't see the packaging to make such a jusdgement.  Also the packaging may have remained intact but a squeeze impact may have damaged the screen but not the packaging

Thank you. I definitely agree that the delay has complicated this issue and a lesson has been learnt. I think we may have received a previous returned tv and that is how it is damaged but I have no way to prove that. The only thing I can do is follow the consumer rights act legislation but I can’t get my complaint to someone senior enough to take it seriously. So frustrating- I know a lot of people likely damage things and then just try and return them but I wouldn’t go to the lengths I am or be dishonest (not implying you think that). Was hoping I would find an email address on here but so far it’s just the usual one that routes to the same team 

Jenkins86

Okell said:

Jenkins86 said:

... Consumer duty states - 

• Within 6 months:
  The burden of proof is still on the retailer.
  That means they must prove the item wasn’t faulty or damaged at the time you received it.
  They can’t just say “you must have damaged it” — they need evidence (e.g., delivery inspection reports, photos from dispatch, etc.).

Samsung by law can’t just say ‘oh it must have been you’. That is what consumer duty protects against... 

Can I ask if the bullet point wording is a paraphrase in your own words, or have you got it from somewhere else?

Also I'm not sure where you've got the phrase "consumer duty" from - it should be the Consumer Rights Act 2015

(I'm curious to know if you've got the wording from somewhere that might be mis-stating the law.  It's reasonbly correct but I've never before seen it expressed how you've expressed it)

That was me rushing, I am referring to the consumer rights act and yes I was paraphrasing. I have read the act and many legal forums on how it is applied etc and I am confident my situation is covered. I just can’t get anyone senior enough to review the case. They keep quoting a manufacturing issue which this isn’t but I’ve gone around in circles 

Jenkins86

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Ultimately you could threaten court action, but if they stand fast, you'd have to hope the court considered that the TV was probably already damaged at purchase.   Samsung would contend it more likely to have been damaged by you.  Who knows how it would end up.

I'd weigh the time, effort and cost of a potential court case against a claim on your contents insurance if you have accidental damage cover.  The excess and any modest premium increase might be better than a lost court fee.

The letter before action might prompt a different response from Samsung, in which case you would have only incurred the cost of a stamp.

Thank you, I will try this and go from there. Definitely a lot of wasted time so far. Won’t not plug a tv in after delivery again 

powerful_Rogue

Jenkins86 said:

Okell said:

Jenkins86 said:

... Consumer duty states - 

• Within 6 months:
  The burden of proof is still on the retailer.
  That means they must prove the item wasn’t faulty or damaged at the time you received it.
  They can’t just say “you must have damaged it” — they need evidence (e.g., delivery inspection reports, photos from dispatch, etc.).

Samsung by law can’t just say ‘oh it must have been you’. That is what consumer duty protects against... 

Can I ask if the bullet point wording is a paraphrase in your own words, or have you got it from somewhere else?

Also I'm not sure where you've got the phrase "consumer duty" from - it should be the Consumer Rights Act 2015

(I'm curious to know if you've got the wording from somewhere that might be mis-stating the law.  It's reasonbly correct but I've never before seen it expressed how you've expressed it)

That was me rushing, I am referring to the consumer rights act and yes I was paraphrasing. I have read the act and many legal forums on how it is applied etc and I am confident my situation is covered. I just can’t get anyone senior enough to review the case. They keep quoting a manufacturing issue which this isn’t but I’ve gone around in circles 

Then your only option left is to send them a Letter Before Action and take them to the small claims court.

PS - I also think this looks like user damage.

Jenkins86

powerful_Rogue said:

Jenkins86 said:

Okell said:

Jenkins86 said:

... Consumer duty states - 

• Within 6 months:
  The burden of proof is still on the retailer.
  That means they must prove the item wasn’t faulty or damaged at the time you received it.
  They can’t just say “you must have damaged it” — they need evidence (e.g., delivery inspection reports, photos from dispatch, etc.).

Samsung by law can’t just say ‘oh it must have been you’. That is what consumer duty protects against... 

Can I ask if the bullet point wording is a paraphrase in your own words, or have you got it from somewhere else?

Also I'm not sure where you've got the phrase "consumer duty" from - it should be the Consumer Rights Act 2015

(I'm curious to know if you've got the wording from somewhere that might be mis-stating the law.  It's reasonbly correct but I've never before seen it expressed how you've expressed it)

That was me rushing, I am referring to the consumer rights act and yes I was paraphrasing. I have read the act and many legal forums on how it is applied etc and I am confident my situation is covered. I just can’t get anyone senior enough to review the case. They keep quoting a manufacturing issue which this isn’t but I’ve gone around in circles 

Then your only option left is to send them a Letter Before Action and take them to the small claims court.

PS - I also think this looks like user damage.

Which just goes to show that we shouldn’t make assumptions as they can be incorrect. I’ve just found a few cases identical to mine on here with Samsung, tv arrived damaged but not opened as Xmas gift so I’m hoping I’ll get some guidance that way 

outtatune

Jenkins86 said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Jenkins86 said:

Okell said:

Jenkins86 said:

... Consumer duty states - 

• Within 6 months:
  The burden of proof is still on the retailer.
  That means they must prove the item wasn’t faulty or damaged at the time you received it.
  They can’t just say “you must have damaged it” — they need evidence (e.g., delivery inspection reports, photos from dispatch, etc.).

Samsung by law can’t just say ‘oh it must have been you’. That is what consumer duty protects against... 

Can I ask if the bullet point wording is a paraphrase in your own words, or have you got it from somewhere else?

Also I'm not sure where you've got the phrase "consumer duty" from - it should be the Consumer Rights Act 2015

(I'm curious to know if you've got the wording from somewhere that might be mis-stating the law.  It's reasonbly correct but I've never before seen it expressed how you've expressed it)

That was me rushing, I am referring to the consumer rights act and yes I was paraphrasing. I have read the act and many legal forums on how it is applied etc and I am confident my situation is covered. I just can’t get anyone senior enough to review the case. They keep quoting a manufacturing issue which this isn’t but I’ve gone around in circles 

Then your only option left is to send them a Letter Before Action and take them to the small claims court.

PS - I also think this looks like user damage.

Which just goes to show that we shouldn’t make assumptions as they can be incorrect. I’ve just found a few cases identical to mine on here with Samsung, tv arrived damaged but not opened as Xmas gift so I’m hoping I’ll get some guidance that way 

Samsung sell TVs by the million.

By sheer probability there will no doubt be tens of thousands that aren't switched on for months after purchase, and by sheer probability there will no doubt be hundreds of those that the purchaser accidentally damages taking the TV out of its box.

Don't rely on these few cases as being proof the TV was already damaged when purchased.

Grumpy_chap

Jenkins86 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Jenkins86 said:

Just to clarify under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, for the first 6 months after delivery, the burden of proof lies with the retailer, not the consumer —whether it’s a fault or damage.

Section 19(14) says: “It is to be taken that the goods did not conform at the time of delivery, unless the trader can prove otherwise.”

The idea that damage is automatically treated differently isn’t supported in the legislation to my knowledge 

Well, the Samsung T's&C's say

4. If your Product(s) arrived damaged when it was delivered, you must notify us within 72 hours of the day you receive the Product(s). Any damage not reported will be determined to have been caused by your handling of the Product(s), unless it can be proven otherwise. We may reduce the full amount of your refund to reflect the reduction in the value of the Product(s) caused by the damage.


I think Samsung would rely on that failure to report damage for the proof of not damaged at delivery.

https://www.samsung.com/uk/estore/static/link-terms-and-conditions-of-sale/

Yes I am aware of the T&C’s, however a companies T&C’s cannot override statutory rights under the consumer rights act. I’m not relying on good will or warranty, I’m going by my legal right to reject a faulty item within the first 6 months of owning it. This is all I need advice on, not the T&C ‘s but thank you for your time regardless. 

But up thread you wrote:

"they must prove the item wasn’t faulty or damaged at the time you received it.

They can’t just say “you must have damaged it” — they need evidence (e.g., delivery inspection reports, photos from dispatch, etc.)."

Given that Samsung are not with you when the TV is received and inspected by yourself, would Samsung provide as their evidence (delivery inspection report) as a negative?
No report received from the consumer, therefore received in satisfactory condition.

Others in the thread have indicated the damage looks like impact damage.  How would you convince small claims court on balance of probability that this damage was present at delivery but not reported for a couple of months?

I am also confused at the whole buying a TV for Mum's birthday but doing so a few months before the decorating was ready.  I understand that a child would want to unwrap on the day but an adult with adult children would surely understand an IOU on the birthday and be glad to receive the TV when the room was ready.  That also preserves the maximum warranty.

saajan_12

Jenkins86 said:

caprikid1 said:

This is clearly impact damage, most likely the screen was picked up in the top corner by your husband when fitting it. I work in IT and have seen it many many times, that is unlikely to be a delivery damage the box would have been trashed that's been picked up in the corner.

No retailer is going to replace that except under insurance, that is very Clear damage and almost 100% handling damage after unpacking. Seen it many many times.

Claim on house insurance if you have accidental damage.

No consumer rights covers damage of this nature.

I appreciate the comment but the TV arrived like this and whilst you might have seen many instances of this, it can’t always be the case as this TV 100% arrived damaged. It looks perfect but it isn’t. For all I know someone has returned it after damaging it and it’s just been sent back out with no checks done. There has to be a way it has happened as we didn’t damage it. 

You're sounding increasingly entrenched in a certainty, when really neither side can be 100% sure.
Samsung COULD have mixed up a return or had a worker grab an item by a corner unnoticed despite all the camera monitoring and testing. Husband or whoever initially checked the tv upon delivery COULD have touched that spot without registering, in the very moment you blinked. 
I understand the argument that its on the retailer to prove but the language above starts to sound unbelievable.. and a judge may se it that way too..
(Note even with the retailer proving it, its not 100% proof to the exclusion of every doubt, its on the balance of probabilities so most likely the damage occured with you v them).