Haha take yer tin foil hat off...honestly

You said the reason being you wouldn't get a professional to do it is because they make out that new models are difficult to repair. After you said you would only get them to repair a newer machine. Anyway, if the op has left the laptop in a place where he can stand on it, I.e. on the floor, them it's likely to be more than just the panel, plastics as well. I don't know how people can treat expensive items with such little care to leave them laying around where they can get trodden on.

Huh? Some of the newer models can be very easy to break if done wrong, due to the slimline design. Just to confirm, you advise doing it if it's newer then?

You don't have to touch the lid, it's the LCD bezel you need to remove. The lid is the top, usually with the logo on it. Monitor? You mean LCD panel surely. To be fair, the new ones are getting harder to do easily due to the thin design. Everything is delicate and intricately packed in, might be worth getting a professional do it.

No because that would be fraud. House insurance is your best route now I think. Is it just the panel that has broken? If so then a new screen wouldn't cost much to supply and fit, if you ask around local repair companies.

Who has confirmed that the hard drive has failed? Who has run a test on the hard drive to check? As another says, is there any physical clunking noises coming from the laptop? Even if the hard drive has failed and you end up with a repair or replacement, then user data is not covered under soga and is your responsibility. I'm gonna guess and say your old backup from the old laptop isn't available or you would be using that. Your first course of action is to actually get it checked out and confirm if the hard drive is faulty or not first.

Now then, that is closer to the definition of fraud. If you've got a good machine, don't tempt fate would be my advice. If you look after your stuff, I'm sure it will last years. I like Sony stuff. Good quality.

Which is fine, but it is a fact that you will lose any no claims bonus and the fact you will have to pay an excess means it still isn't quite the same. Plus the cost of house insurance goes up too. I know, it's happened to me before, wasn't worth the claim in the end.

Because if you watch live tv, its the law. Some people think they are above this though, cake and eat it kind of people...

I had the same dilemma. But they wanted to delay my phone and broadband installation, so I just stuck with virgin for them and took sky tv. Best choice I ever made, now I get the best of both worlds. I would advise anyone going to sky to do the same.

You dropped the phone, who knows what faults you caused by damaging it. Even if it continued to work after, you can not be sure that you haven't caused components to fail before time. Can't you get an independent phone shop to inspect it and give you a report based on their findings? The onus is on you to prove the fault is a manufacturing defect anyway so that would be a start. I have to be honest though and say it might be hard to prove you haven't caused damage, even with the known problem samsung are aware of.

Does SOGA cover you for accidental damage? I would suggest checking the definition of fraud again.

Looks to me like you knew you weren't meant to do a u turn but did it anyway and got caught? You saw 3 no u turn signs didn't you? Is that the gist of it? If so, take it on chin and learn from it.

In this case wasn't it accidental damage? How is SOGA relevant in damage cases?

It was a quite frankly absurd statement. No company could get away with rarely, if ever, fixing stuff they are obliged to. All warranties, whatever the product, whatever the retailer has things that aren't covered. The warranty on my boiler states misuse and neglect aren't covered. I also have to service it to keep the warranty intact. If I didn't service it or I somehow used it incorrectly, do you think the warranty company should honour the claim?

I think this place would be a lot busier if that were really true wouldn't it?

For me the person who's account was fraudulently used could be playing the system here. Who's is to say that they didn't send a family member or friend to collect the phone. They claim fraud and they get a refund and a phone. It's not been looked into properly. It needs investigating and PayPal need to do this properly, rather than just trying to claim their costs back from the op straight away. If they investigated however and find that op was negligent (not following proper payment/selling instructions), then surely the op has to bear some or all of the blame and would be liable. But PayPal would need to show the op the report and explain why they have found what they have found. If the first paragraph of my post is true and they can prove this, then I would say that over rides the ops liability and the 3rd party would be liable. I guess what I am saying is PayPal need to do more legwork here and rather than just jumping into a conclusion, look at the matter and then decide after looking into the facts. Surely they have a fraud team?

It's not really a dirty sales tactic is it. It's same method that any company uses who provide a free months service or trial of anything. Amazon prime, Lovefilm, Netflix, Xbox live etc You privde your bank details in case you don't want to cancel and continue the monthly payments. There is always the assumption that if you don't want to continue with the service after the first month that you will cancel. I am not sure why it wasn't cancelled when you requested though, why not just cancel the DD? I find it is the easiest way for me to stop a payment I no longer want to go out.

Which rental company was it?

That's assuming that the rental company provide insurance. The price that the op paid them might have excluded insurance. When I hired a van it came with no insurance so I had to take out my own separate day cover. It made the price cheaper of the rental. Also like you said, let's say the op checks his t&cs and finds they did provide cover, I bet there will be exclusions, such as misuse.

You made a mistake, you said so. Did you take out your own insurance (as required to by law if the rental company don't supply this)? If you did then you will need to claim on that. Were there warning signs that stated height restrictions?

I don't think a £70 printer would pass the reasonable time standard. As far as laser printers go, this would be very low end. I would cut my losses and buy new. Printers these days last a few years before the heads go (depending on use), so they are almost disposable themselves. It's why they are so cheap. Only when you go high end £300+ would I consider it unreasonable to last 3 years. Is it really worth the hassle vs the price of a new one? Unless you are one of these sue culture peeps who just love to argue for the sake of it...

Out of interest, how do you know for sure the mainboard is causing the phone to freeze and that will resolve your issue? Have you then one inspected by a qualified engineer or something?

You could pay a satellite engineer to come and check the state of the dish and see if it is serviceable. I would have thought a basic call out and diagnosis charge would be no more than £30 and he may be able to repair or fix the problem without parts. If so, you're laughing. If not, you can get on to sky and see if they can do you a deal on a new dish. Unfortunately you are only covered with sky for 12 months. After that you are liable for the dish and the box. It's one of the benefits of virgin media, they keep ownership of the equipment so if it messes up, they fix it for you.

From the UK Government "Notices [i.e. clauses in terms and conditions] CAN be used to exclude or restrict statutory rights in relation to all goods when buyers are other than consumers (business buyers, companies) – although any such exclusion or restriction must be reasonable." It is the supply of goods and services act of 1982 that applies. It DOES apply to business sales, but does not give the business buyer as much protection as a consumer. The act states: "Where, under such a contract, the transferor transfers the property in goods in the course of a business, there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.(2A)For the purposes of this section and section 5 below, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances." I don't think that a brand new laptop being faulty is reasonable, so I think they should have taken steps to help you. What did they offer in the beginning? Did they offer to replace? With the touchpad not working, did you check if it was disabled or turned off (probably, but thought I'd ask out of interest).