Washing machine 30 month old

daveliz

Looking for advice

I bought a washing machine from Currys Clearance (ebay), and been in daily use, never overloaded and it has been good until recently before developing a fault.

I contacted Samsung as I thought I'd activated their extra warranty but appears I never did.

In short I got an engineer to come have a look and report for me as I was going to attempt to claim on CRA-2015 if needed.

Turns out the fly wheel nut needed tightning and this resolved the issue and the machine is even better now than before imo. Currys is rejecting my claim for Reimbursement of engineer fees and claiming wear and tear.

What are my options as I'm out of pocket £108.

Quoted, "We note you purchased the product on 14th November 2023, and the item was sold as REFURB-C, with a 12-month warranty. As you correctly identify, the warranty period has now expired, and as such we are unable to offer any kind of partial refund.
We note you seek a return on the basis of the provision of the Consumer Rights Act.

The issue you describe is not indicative of a manufacturing defect, that would otherwise render the product unfit for purpose, or of unsatisfactory quality, but rather an issue attributable to wear and tear, or a malfunction that has developed through use and the passage of time. The product has functioned satisfactorily since it's purchase over 30 months ago and accordingly, we believe has conformed to the provisions of the legislation. As such, we are unable to offer a partial refund for this order."

Glad

I think the difficulty is that you're not asking to return the machine, you're asking Currys to reimburse the £108 engineer's fee.

After 30 months, the Consumer Rights Act doesn't automatically make the retailer liable. The burden is on you to show the fault was inherent, i.e. present when the machine was supplied, rather than something that developed through use.

Did the engineer actually state in writing that the loose flywheel nut was due to a manufacturing or refurbishment defect? If not, I can see why Currys have rejected the claim. Simply tightening the nut and restoring normal operation doesn't necessarily show the machine didn't conform to the CRA when you bought it.

If the engineer's report does say the fault was inherent, I'd go back to Currys with that evidence. If it doesn't, I'm not sure there's much prospect of recovering the £108.

daveliz

Yea thats what I was fearing, the report merely stated engineer "Callout", he tightened the nut to resolve the issue.

Something I would have done as I did inspect myself and found it but did not as I didn't want to be liable for tampering.

Guess I just put on my big boy pants in this casse and suck it up.