Forum Home» Consumer Rights

Out of Warranty LG TV - Argos - Page 2

New Post Advanced Search

Out of Warranty LG TV - Argos

edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Consumer Rights
19 replies 1.4K views
2»

Replies

  • Hi. Just a quick bit of advice... please don't allow yourself to get caught up in the use of the phrase 'inherent fault' as has been suggested. Some retailers try to evade their responsibilities by saying that you have to prove the item (in your case a TV) has an "inherent fault". This is nonsense. The Consumer Rights Act clearly states that goods must last for a reasonable time (taking into account the price paid). If an item develops a fault within six years REGARDLESS of whether or not the fault was in place at the time of purchase, then you have a case against the retailer under the CRA. If you go down the route of commissioning an independent report, you merely need that report to state that the TV "has failed in an unreasonable period of time" and that you "have not done anything to contribute to or cause the fault". While it would be handy if the report also states a fault was inherent at the time of purchase, you do not need to prove this. The problem you will face though is that retailers either deliberately or mistakenly don't want to listen - and they repeatedly pedal the phrase 'inherent fault' which then gets repeated by everyone else including consumers ad nauseam. However do bear in mind that you have had two years use out of the TV (which would have a reasonable expected life of six years), so you should expect the retailer to contribute two thirds of the repair cost, or to reimburse you two thirds of the cost of the faulty TV. In other words, you are not entitled to the full cost of repair or replacement or refund.
  • lincroft1710lincroft1710 Forumite
    13.6K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SouthUKMan wrote: »
    Hi. Just a quick bit of advice... please don't allow yourself to get caught up in the use of the phrase 'inherent fault' as has been suggested. Some retailers try to evade their responsibilities by saying that you have to prove the item (in your case a TV) has an "inherent fault". This is nonsense. The Consumer Rights Act clearly states that goods must last for a reasonable time (taking into account the price paid). If an item develops a fault within six years REGARDLESS of whether or not the fault was in place at the time of purchase, then you have a case against the retailer under the CRA. If you go down the route of commissioning an independent report, you merely need that report to state that the TV "has failed in an unreasonable period of time" and that you "have not done anything to contribute to or cause the fault". While it would be handy if the report also states a fault was inherent at the time of purchase, you do not need to prove this. The problem you will face though is that retailers either deliberately or mistakenly don't want to listen - and they repeatedly pedal the phrase 'inherent fault' which then gets repeated by everyone else including consumers ad nauseam. However do bear in mind that you have had two years use out of the TV (which would have a reasonable expected life of six years), so you should expect the retailer to contribute two thirds of the repair cost, or to reimburse you two thirds of the cost of the faulty TV. In other words, you are not entitled to the full cost of repair or replacement or refund.

    Where is it stated that a TV or any other item is expected to last 6 years? Many items are designed to last less than 6 years, especially TVs. The rest of your advice is also incorrect. If an inherent fault is found then the retailer can replace, repair or refund. Any repair should be done completely free of charge, but a refund can take account of the usage of an item.
  • powerful_Roguepowerful_Rogue Forumite
    4.6K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    SouthUKMan wrote: »
    Hi. Just a quick bit of advice... please don't allow yourself to get caught up in the use of the phrase 'inherent fault' as has been suggested. Some retailers try to evade their responsibilities by saying that you have to prove the item (in your case a TV) has an "inherent fault". This is nonsense. The Consumer Rights Act clearly states that goods must last for a reasonable time (taking into account the price paid). If an item develops a fault within six years REGARDLESS of whether or not the fault was in place at the time of purchase, then you have a case against the retailer under the CRA. If you go down the route of commissioning an independent report, you merely need that report to state that the TV "has failed in an unreasonable period of time" and that you "have not done anything to contribute to or cause the fault". While it would be handy if the report also states a fault was inherent at the time of purchase, you do not need to prove this. The problem you will face though is that retailers either deliberately or mistakenly don't want to listen - and they repeatedly pedal the phrase 'inherent fault' which then gets repeated by everyone else including consumers ad nauseam. However do bear in mind that you have had two years use out of the TV (which would have a reasonable expected life of six years), so you should expect the retailer to contribute two thirds of the repair cost, or to reimburse you two thirds of the cost of the faulty TV. In other words, you are not entitled to the full cost of repair or replacement or refund.


    What a load of nonsense.
  • brisbris Forumite
    9.3K posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    What a load of nonsense.
    But his pal down the pub told him, so it must be true...
  • Rainbowgirl84Rainbowgirl84 Forumite
    1.2K posts
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭
    bris wrote: »
    But his pal down the pub told him, so it must be true...
    ...and the guy down the Chip Shop swears he's Elvis. SouthUKMan does have a bad advice history.
  • Rainbowgirl84Rainbowgirl84 Forumite
    1.2K posts
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭
    ...and guess who will be at risk of being PPR'd by MSE for pointing it out?
  • ididntgetwhereiamtodayididntgetwhereiamtoday Forumite
    1.6K posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭
    Why do people still buy TVs from places that don't offer 5 or 6 year warranties? There are plenty that do.
    If you have no joy with the consumer law route because of accidental damage then you could claim off your home insurance. There will be excess but for an £800 TV it will be worth claiming.
    I didn't get where i am today by not reading moneysavingexpert.com
  • FosterdogFosterdog Forumite
    4.8K posts
    Eighth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Why do people still buy TVs from places that don't offer 5 or 6 year warranties? There are plenty that do.
    If you have no joy with the consumer law route because of accidental damage then you could claim off your home insurance. There will be excess but for an £800 TV it will be worth claiming.

    But this does sound like impact damage so even if it had a 20 year guarantee it would almost certainly exclude the damage in this scenario.
  • ididntgetwhereiamtodayididntgetwhereiamtoday Forumite
    1.6K posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭
    Fosterdog wrote: »
    But this does sound like impact damage so even if it had a 20 year guarantee it would almost certainly exclude the damage in this scenario.
    By the by, having a free 5 year warranty is just one less hurdle meaning that the store will at least have to look into it.
    If accidental, That’s when you claim on house insurance if you have it.
    I didn't get where i am today by not reading moneysavingexpert.com
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support