Help - any advice out there?

[MrRee]

Bought a LG 42" Plasma from CURRYS 24th March 2007.

 

In the summer I noticed a Bright Green Flashing Pixel at about the 2 o'clock position and towards the central area of the screen, it was holiday time and we were away for the summer.

 

On my return I contacted the 'Tech Guys' about the problem - the TV was now 23 weeks old.

 

The 'Tech Guy' on the end of the phone was pleasant and assured me that it needed a replacement PCB, this would cure the problem and they could send someone out in 7 days as they have the part. I tried to tell him that it was a faulty panel (I am an Electronics Engineer), but he assured me that the PCB would fix it. I said ok.

 

2 Engineers turn up with a replacement PCB, as they said they would, took one look at the TV and said, "Its the panel Sir" ...... "but, the pixel is right on the borderline of the area we can replace" ..... "not sure what to do, could send it into the workshops, but it will be away for up to 28 days and then it may come back as it is, I would advise against that" ...... "I would take it back to the shop where you bought it, or contact the Manager, he may help you" - off they go.

 

Rang the shop Manager ...... he took my details and said he would ring back, he did saying, "Sorry Sir, it would appear as if the TV is within Manufacturers Tolerances, I'm not going to offer anything - yes, it has a fault, but we don't think it is unacceptable"

 

Letter to MD of CURRYS.

 

Another 2 Engineers come out to have a look, they hold a picture of a rectangle within a rectangle - "as it is a Green flashing pixel, Sir, and is the most annoying pixel fault you have have - we only require that ONE SINGLE Pixel falls within this area" pointing to the inner rectangle drawing.

 

He looks at the pixel position and back at his sheet of paper and back at the flashing green pixel again ...... "It looks like it is right on the borderline Sir, not sure what to do" - "If I measure from the panel edge then the pixel falls within the unacceptable area, if I measure from the visible edge it just falls outside - one position and you get a new TV, the other you don't get anything!" ..... "I cannot make a judgement, I'll ring the workshops".

 

He rings the workshops, who amazingly, also do NOT know where to take the measurement from!! - So? Why have a measurement if no-one knows how to use it!

 

In desperation he says, "I can get it taken into the workshops and you can hope that they will think it is within the replacement area - but, it may be away for 28 days and after that time it may return not fixed ... and Sir, may be scratched and chipped after being thrown about the workshop - I will offer you that option because it's all I can do"

 

I declined to lose the TV for 28 days with no guarantee that the fault would be fixed.

 

Another letter to CURRYS rejecting the TV, response was ..... 'We offered to take the TV in for assessment and you refused, there is nothing else we can do'

 

No repair has been carried out - just 4 Engineers looking at it.

 

What CAN I do?

 

Thanks for reading this far, you deserve a medal - if you can help, please give me some guidance.

[gyzmo]

You wont be entitled to a refund, but can get a repair or replacement, which should be with minimal inconvenience (so bang on at them for a replacement TV whilst yours is being repaired).

 

As for their "tolerances", I fail to see what that has to do with anything. I bet they described the TV as havng crystal clear images, feel like your really there etc etc. Well, do people normally walk round with a green spot in front of their eyes? No. This is quite different from normal tolerances - e.g, the accuracy of a thermometer may be give or take half a degree - that cannot be helped.

 

You should accept the repair, bearing in mind the time, but should also expect minimal inconvenience.

[MrRee]

Thank you for your advice.

 

I was under the impression that goods under 6 months old when rejected were, in the eyes of the Law, considered faulty when new - therefore a refund or replacement is in order?

 

As I understand it also, a TV is not considered essential - so they don't have to supply a temporary replacement.

 

Please understand that CURRYS have not offered a repair, in fact - they say that although there is a fault - it is a reasonable fault!

[Douglas52]

The sale of goods act states-

For the purposes of this Act, 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 do not think a flashing green pixel is satisfactory irrespective of the manufacturers specification. A defective pixel (blank) but not flashing green. It would be up to a court to decide what is reasonable - the manufacturers specifications may not have full force especially if these are not clearly stated in the contract.

 

The act also states

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date.

This suggests that the TV is treated as faulty from delivery if a fault develops in the first 6 months - so you areentitled to replacement.

[MrRee]

Thanks for that post ........ backs up my position really.

 

Would I have to take the TV into court? It is rather BIG!

 

Does anyone know why CURRYS are being so unreasonable? Do they always treat customers this badly?

[Oh Boy!]

A lot of CAG members are complaining about LG TV's

[MrRee]

Because of faults??

 

I have to say I hesitated about buying LG - but it was simply the very best picture quality in the shop!

 

I would like my money back so I can buy another - if an LG still offers the best PQ then thats what I shall get .............. unless LG TV's simply don't last.

[Oh Boy!]

MrRee,

 

Yes because of faults.

 

Don't know why.

 

Demand your money back, i brought a Tv from currys, 2000.00 after 1 week i found that i could see three lines in the screen, this was a normal tv not plasma or lcd, i called currys and complained, there engineers said that because tv is 100hz tv, it has "hang lines", where some how the tv tube is hanging in the casing or some nonsense, they said every 100hz tv has it, i researched it, and indeed this was common, you had to look really to see it, but it was important to me coz i could see it, i could a refund with no arguments.

 

I think you need to fire a letter include the quotes from :

 

 

Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002

 

48B Repair or replacement of the goods

 

 

(1) If section 48A above applies, the buyer may require the seller -

 

• (a) to repair the goods, or
   
  (b) to replace the goods.

(2) If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods, the seller must -

• (a) repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;
   
  (b) bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).

(3) The buyer must not require the seller to repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods if that remedy is -

• (a) impossible, or
   
  (b) disproportionate in comparison to the other of those remedies, or
   
  © disproportionate in comparison to an appropriate reduction in the purchase price under paragraph (a), or rescission under paragraph (b), of section 48C(1) below.

(4) One remedy is disproportionate in comparison to the other if the one imposes costs on the seller which, in comparison to those imposed on him by the other, are unreasonable, taking into account -

• (a) the value which the goods would have if they conformed to the contract of sale,
   
  (b) the significance of the lack of conformity, and
   
  © whether the other remedy could be effected without significant inconvenience to the buyer.

(5) Any question as to what is a reasonable time or significant inconvenience is to be determined by reference to -

• (a) the nature of the goods, and
   
  (b) the purpose for which the goods were acquired.

[Oh Boy!]

And Also Bedtime reading :-

 

 

Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended By The Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002)

 

Under the Act you are entitled to expect that any goods you buy from a trader are entitled to be: of satisfactory quality,fit for any particular purpose made known to the seller; andas described.

 

Satisfactory quality means that the goods would meet the standard a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory taking into account the description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all other relevant circumstances.

 

The quality of the goods includes their state and condition including their appearance and finish, freedom from minor defects, safety and durability.

 

They should also be fit for all purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied.

 

Your rights under this Act are against the person who sold you the goods and not the manufacturer. You have no real grounds for a complaint if you:

 

were told about the fault before you purchased the item;

 

examined the item when you bought it and should have seen the fault;

 

made a mistake when purchasing the item;

simply changed your mind about the item.

 

Remedies

Since 31 March 2003 you have more rights under the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002. If a product that was faulty at the time of sale is returned to the retailer, you are legally entitled to:

 

a full refund- If you have a complaint about something you bought you should tell the seller as soon as possible.

 

This is because if you are considered to have 'accepted' goods you can lose the right to a full refund.

 

One way to 'accept' goods is to keep them beyond a reasonable time without rejecting them; or a reasonable amount of compensation (or "damages") - If you have bought faulty goods and have 'accepted' them you may have to accept an offer to put the goods right or the cost of a repair.

 

If the fault cannot be put right or the cost of putting it right is unreasonable you may be able to claim appropriate compensation but you would have to keep this claim to a reasonable minimum.a repair or replacement -

 

Under the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002, you have the right to ask for a repair or a replacement, providing that it does not cost more than you paid for the item. This then should be provided within a reasonable period of time.

 

GuaranteesWhere goods are offered with a consumer guarantee, the consumer can request that the guarantee be made available in writing and that the terms of the guarantee should be set out in plain language which can be easily understood.

 

This should be in English if offered in the United Kingdom and should give details of how to make a claim under the guarantee. A contract will also be made between you and the guarantor. This means that if the guarantor refuses to honour the guarantee you may be able to take legal action.

[Douglas52]

I advise caution- check your facts. Check that their terms and conditions do not include a statment about faulty pixels or a coverall about manufacturers specifications because this could be a counter argument within the law.

 

Definitley write your letter quoting the sale of goods act- this shows them you know your rights, stick to the point and be reasonable and polite.

[Oh Boy!]

Quite so, but their Terms and Conditions CANNOT SUPERSEDE STATUTORY RIGHTS AND LAW

[gyzmo]

I would not bother demaninding a refund - any conditions of the contract will now be warranties and the best that can be hoped for is either damages for cost of repair or a repair itself (then replacement if that is not possible). any remedy provided under the new reqgulations are in order of repair / replacement / refund - whichever is cheapest and most convenient / suitable.

[Douglas52]

I do not agree Gyzmo - the set was less than 6 months old when he first complained therefore it is new as stated in the SOG act.

 

Here's an interesting link I found for XBox users on this topic

Dead Pixels - Your Rights - Matchbox360

 

I think the key issue is- did they specifically inform you of the iso standard on dead pixels before you bought the set otherwise you were mis-informed and might not have bought the set if you were properly informed.

[MrRee]

An interesting point I have discovered (not that the Warranty removes my statutory rights) is this:-

 

The 5 Year Extended Warranty offered by LG states that, in some cases, a faulty pixel is excluded from the plan.

 

HOWEVER, in their 12 Month Guarantee, there is no such clause!

 

One would assume, reasonably, that they had considered including it in their 12 Month Guarantee - but decided against it ..... it's ommission would indicate that a paulty pixel WOULD be a justified fault.

 

I have asked CURRYS to send me the Manufacturers Specification which they have used in assessing the TV - be interesting if they can show it!

 

Gyzmo - thanks for your replies, but you seem to be a bit off the mark??

[gyzmo]

As to the refund - that is recission of the contract which can only happen where there is a breach of a condition. As the goods have been accepted (I canot see how they cannot be after so mouch time), that condition becomes a warranty, meaning only damages can be claimed for. Under the 2003 regs, thta is translated to repair or replacement. I doubt a refund would happen (unless it was partial) as the other two remedies are more suitable.

A full refund being given would be very nice, but I cannot see how there is any entitlement to it.

 

And if you are think of the Trade Descriptions Act, I doubt that would be successful as it would be making a criminal offence out of a mere beach of warranty. Additionally, you would have to demonstate that this specification was something you relied upon or induced the contract. I cannot see that has happened and I cannot see that it would be allowed as a good reason for total rejection of the goods.

[MrRee]

Gyzmo - the understanding I have is that goods which are less than 6 months old when faulty are deemed to have had that fault at the point of sale .... therefore a FULL refund is expected and would have to be given?

 

Maybe I'm wrong - I am new to this, but if you could show me something which contavenes this I would be really greatful.

 

I do appreciate all the help I can get from you experienced consumers.

[Douglas52]

I do not know that the goods have been accepted in this case.

 

Here is the Trading standards guide

 

Trading Standards Central - Trading Standards and Consumer Protection information for the UK

 

At the start it states

 

Terms given to a consumer after the contract is made (for example, terms written on the back of a receipt) are not part of the contract and they have no effect.

 

Also look at Additional remedies for consumer buyers

 

which once again states 6 months. Of course a court is free to make your interpretation.

[gyzmo]

You are correct about the 6 month rule, but that only relates to the burden of proof (generally the doctrine of "he who accuses must prove" applies, but the rule reverses that). It is for the seller to prove that the fault did not exist, and not for the buyer to prove it did.

 

In terms of the refund - it is as I have said before. A breach of condition allows for recission of the contract, but the acceptance of goods means that conditions become warranties. A breach of a warranty entitles one to damages only, therefore no full refund can be claimed (at least not on this basis, and I do not know of any other basis that would apply here).

 

 

With all respect, I have mentioned this three times now - it is a basic doctrine of law.

 

As an example, you purchase a coat with an inherently faulty zip (just so it exists at time of sale). Three months later (after wearing it twice), you go back to the shop. It would be unreasonable for a full refund as the item can be repaired or even replaced. On the other hand, a carpet is ordered during decoraton and when opened a month later, it is found to be the wrong colour, material and of very poor quality (threads coming out etc). It would be unreasonable to expect a repair, so a replacement would be in order. however, in the case of the carpet, there could be an argument as to whether the goods have been accepted - is it reasonable to open the carpet during decorating to insepct it? I doubt it. Is it unreasonable to order it knowing it wont be opened for another month or so? Probably not - you do not want to order at the last minute and have a bare floor.

[gyzmo]

Of course a court is free to make your interpretation.

 

A court is not free to make my interpretation - it has already been made long ago in the Appellate courts - and it is for the court to follow such decisions - the underlying basis of which I have stated (several times) in this thread.

 

It comes down to whether or not the goods have been accepted or not, which is determined in s. 32 of SoGA, specifically in this case subsections 1,2 adn 4. I would say that the time the OP has had to examine the goods is ample enough to determine that it conforms to the contract, and during that time has not indicated to the seller that he wishes to reject the goods or intimated as such. Had this occurred a few days after purchase, the situation may be different. The only hope would be to argue that not sufficient time has passed for the goods to be examined. Unless it is the most complicated TV ever created, I cannot see that as being the case.

[patdavies]

I do not agree Gyzmo - the set was less than 6 months old when he first complained therefore it is new as stated in the SOG act.

 

Here's an interesting link I found for XBox users on this topic

Dead Pixels - Your Rights - Matchbox360

 

I think the key issue is- did they specifically inform you of the iso standard on dead pixels before you bought the set otherwise you were mis-informed and might not have bought the set if you were properly informed.

 

The site that you quote is no more authoritative than here (probably less so;))

 

Also,this isn't a case of a dead pixel (which might be overlooked), it is a flashing pixel which by the nature of the human animal will attract disproportionate attention to the eye.

 

The human eye/brain can automatically fill for a single missing pixel in a picture, but a flashing light will draw the eye.

[Douglas52]

OK Gyzmo that's really good useful information- clearly you're much better informed or trained(?). How does it handle a fault that has devloped within the first months of buying the set?

[gyzmo]

The same situation applies - the remedy you have depends on whether the goods have been accepted or not.