Jump to content


i bought a ps3 from dixons.co.uk Returning faulty/noisy games console


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3512 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

hi, i bought a ps3 from dixons.co.uk at the end of jan 2008 and i believe its faulty. can i demand a replacement under sale of goods act or do i have to give them a chance to repair it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are allowed the opportunity to repair it should they wish, any fault that comes under s48 of the soga leaves the retailer in deciding the most cost effective solution to themselves to solve the problem.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They are allowed the opportunity to repair it should they wish, any fault that comes under s48 of the soga leaves the retailer in deciding the most cost effective solution to themselves to solve the problem.

I think not:

Sale of Goods: Basic Rights - Consumer Wiki

 

S.48B provides that the buyer can require the seller to repair or replace the goods at the sellers expense

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think not:

Sale of Goods: Basic Rights - Consumer Wiki

 

S.48B provides that the buyer can require the seller to repair or replace the goods at the sellers expense

The buyer can require the seller to just means that. Who else would require the seller to fix or swap it?

 

48 also says that any remedy offered must not be disproportionate to the other and must not cause the the buyer undue inconvenience.

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My emphasis was to show that under the SOGA, it is the buyer who can require a replacement from the seller and therefore the buyer does not have to accept the seller's offer of a repair. Blitz had suggested that the retailer decides.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My emphasis was to show that under the SOGA, it is the buyer who can require a replacement from the seller and therefore the buyer does not have to accept the seller's offer of a repair. Blitz had suggested that the retailer decides.

The sentence reads as a whole. The buyer may require the seller to repair or replace the goods.

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The seller always has the opportunity of deciding which route to go as outlined below from the Sales of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) Sale of Goods Act 1979 as amended up to date to 1/10/2003

The buyer does not have to agree to the repair but if they do refuse, the seller can also refuse the request for a replacement leaving you still with a faulty item.

 

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.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the likely parts and labour costs involved in repairing a PS3, its not unreasonable for the buyer to require a replacement because it wouldn't be disproportionate.

 

Of course, since the PS3 is a current model, its not impossible either.

 

The OP might also argue that it would be inconvenient for a repair. The PS3 might be their only DVD player, for example

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, i eventually got through to dixons. the first person i spoke to said i need to contact this number "blah blah" and sony will arrange a repair under warranty. i didnt want this- i wanted to return under soga and not manufacturers warranty. so i came on here to confirm and i called them back with a view to them arranging the repair/replacement themselves. the second person i spoke to automatically advised they would collect the faulty item and give me a new one. fingers crossed!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Considering the likely parts and labour costs involved in repairing a PS3, its not unreasonable for the buyer to require a replacement because it wouldn't be disproportionate.

 

Of course, since the PS3 is a current model, its not impossible either.

 

The OP might also argue that it would be inconvenient for a repair. The PS3 might be their only DVD player, for example

Sorry, but why is being without a DVD player inconvenient? It isn't an essential item.

 

I wouldnt argue a PC is. Things like fridges, ovens more so.

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inconvenience is relative. I like to watch a lot of DVDs. Therefore it would be inconvenient to not have my DVD player. No, its not an essential, but the SOGA does not make that distinction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but a judge with a little common sense would...

 

It's hardly inconvenient by anyone's standards to be without a ps3 for a week or so until it gets repaired. It is a hobby, not a necessity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, but a judge with a little common sense would...

 

It's hardly inconvenient by anyone's standards to be without a ps3 for a week or so until it gets repaired. It is a hobby, not a necessity.

Exactly. I was always under the impression if you were claiming undue inconvenience you would have to back up with a valid reason.

Like if you were a student and your PC broke then repairing it wouldnt be an option if you had a major project to hand in in a day or two and no other resource access. That would be provable inconvenience.

 

But suggesting you have no DVD player would cause you inconvenience because you need to watch DVDs is mad. My CD player was being repaired last year and I had to use my DVD player or PC - you get round it. And someone who is that reliant on watching movies could be said to have no life.

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To have a successful request for a replacement/refund instead of a repair due to inconvience the repair would have to be either:

On an essential item, in which activities that are required by the person can not be done without this item.

Or to get the item repaired it would require you to go significantly out of your way.

 

Saying that you cannot play games for a week/month is not a valid reason you are not required to play video games.

 

The above still stands it is still with the retailer to decide whether its a repair or replacement, they are a business and as such will usually decide the option which is easier for themselves which is what that paragraph is for, to be fair on the retailer whilst the consumer still receives a solution to his problem.

 

Kp: You can leave the PS3 in dixons hands to solve the problem, in which they will usually send it off under the manufactures warranty to sony/repair centre anyway. I would suggest going with whatever option is easier for yourself, it will be repaired by the same people one goes directly to sony the other goes through dixons. I know the xbox repairs are much easier to go via microsoft then a retailer but unfortunatly am unfamiliar with the sony process.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

brief history:

24/01/08 - bought a ps3 online

12/04/08 - faulty, dixons advised they would send return labels and exchange for new one

21/0408 - sent item back

22/04/08 - they received it

26/04/08 - received two email, one saying my new order was being processed and one saying my refund has been issued. dealing with the new order:

29/04/08 - phoned dixons for order update, told they had stock and would be delivered within 5 working days of 26th (fair enough)

01/05/08 - order status hadnt changed from new order being processed. phoned dixons and told they had stock but had to wait til 5th working day

02/05/08 (fifth working day) - phone up and told they have no stock. after some arguing i asked for a refund. now the cost of the order was £0.00 so i suspect no refund. and this is where this side of it will probably end.

 

going back to the original refund email from 26th:

the refund was actioned on 26th and the email says should receive 4-7 days (not working). today is the 6th day so i phoned them up and they suggested i wait until tuesday.

 

now, from what i've read about dixons, they are pretty bad when it comes to CS. at what point do i start kicking off/ going to trading standards etc etc. i know at the moment its only 6 days since refund issued (effectively we're on the 5th working day) but given that its dixons i dont want to start being fobbed off with regards to the refund. they told me it will be 4-7 days, tomorrow is the 7th day. whats the best course of action to take?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I'm just thinking that you could be sneaky and try and class the new order as a new contract, thereby enabling the distance selling regs to come into play but I think that is a REALLY long shot and requires several huge leaps in logic.

 

More practically, I think you are looking at making time of the essence and asking them to complete their remedy under 5A of SoGA. It is causing inconvenience (not in a grand way but it is inconvenient all the same - they have your money AND your goods). I would say that if they are unable to provide the required reedy then you are entitled to require one of your own - a refund. Now this is done pro-rata for use (you are not entitled to a full refund now) you have had. You could argue however tha the use you have NOT had (whilst they have had it), shoudl be compensated, thereby negating any deduction for useage.

 

The fact that it is a different order shoudl not matter. Thinking about it though, if they insist on it being a new order, tell them they are in that case in breach of the distance selling regs and you are perfectly entitled to rescind the contract, without need to give any reason, for full payment (which is the cost of a new PS3 funnily enough). If they want to use leaps of logic - use a few more yourself! But it is not a new order. i is a remedy of their original contract. you can either play them at their own game or insist tha they stop ar**g around.

 

A quick phone call with confirmation in writing should suffice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, thanks for responding. i think i probably put a little too much info in post though. dixons have already said they will refund me the full amount, im just wondering how long i should wait for the refund before going in all guns blazing, and what course of action should i take? trading standards, etc? i dont want to sit around being fobbed off by dixons. ive read about people not getting their refund for months. i basically want to get heavy handed now rather than wait 2-3 weeks and then going through the notions. best route to take?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would firstly report it to Consumer Direct. They need information like this for intelligence purposes.

 

Then send a letter to them giving 14 days to pay up or you will issue court proceedings. You have been patient enough.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...

hi, i'm not getting much response on my complaint to dixons ceo or his team. is it possible to escalate further?

 

a brief summary- i emailed ceo and received an acknowledgement confirming receipt and promise of a response within 72hrs. response never came so i emailed again and this time received a response asking some questions. i replied but heard nothing back so i called and left a message for that staff member to give me a call. no call so i sent another email and received a holiday email from staff member advising they were out for a week. so i emailed again but this time no acknowledgement.

 

where do i go from here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

put a copy in writing to :-

Dixons

PO Box 1686

Sheffield

S2 5YB

 

Inform them your problem and also that the CEOs department has not replied to your emails.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
hi, i'm not getting much response on my complaint to dixons ceo or his team. is it possible to escalate further?

 

a brief summary- i emailed ceo and received an acknowledgement confirming receipt and promise of a response within 72hrs. response never came so i emailed again and this time received a response asking some questions. i replied but heard nothing back so i called and left a message for that staff member to give me a call. no call so i sent another email and received a holiday email from staff member advising they were out for a week. so i emailed again but this time no acknowledgement.

 

where do i go from here?

 

No, I don't suppose you can go above the CEO. I recently had to email the CEO. He delegated the head of customer services to solve my problem. Although I got a replacement eventually it took about 6 visits to sort out. It also mean't me writing to the CEO to say how useless the head of customer services was.

 

The only thing you can do is avoid both Currys and PCWorld. Put them on a blacklist and never ever buy anything from them again. If it makes you feel better email the CEO to state this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...