Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'replacements'.
Found 1 result
Hi everyone, I am looking for some advice as to the application of the Consumer Rights Act or other relevant legislation to insurance replacements. The situation is as follows: I had an iPhone replaced under insurance in March of this year. It was replaced with a brand new, sealed unit in original Apple packaging. The phone has developed a fault 5 months after receiving it. On contacting Apple, they advised that they were not the retailer and that I should contact the people I got it from and request a replacement under the Consumer Rights Act. Apple did, however, completely accept that the fault was a manufacturing or pre existing fault and actually told me that if they had directly supplied the original phone, they would have replaced it no questions asked. I have contacted the insurance company and asked for a replacement and they have refused to replace the phone without me making a new claim and paying an excess. They claim that their T&Cs state they only offer a 90 day warranty and that the Consumer Rights Act does not apply to them. I argued that they supplied me a new item, which I have indirectly paid for as I pay the insurance premium that allowed the replacement and therefore I have consumer rights and they should replace the item. It is my opinion that they are acting in the same capacity as a retailer when they supplied the phone and hence should afford me the same rights. So, my questions are: Who is right? Should I pursue a claim or give up and pay the excess? Is there any other legislation that is relevant here? Do I perhaps have some rights with the O2, the original retailer of both the phone and insurance policy? Note that O2 Insurance is not actually part of O2 at all, they are actually Brightstar Insurance, a separate company. Thanks in advance! rune