Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Partial refund as tv is unrepairable


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5529 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

Philips are offering me a part refund on my tv set as they are unable to fix it, they've had it for 7 weeks already and have now decided that they are unable to source the required part.

 

I am looking for advice on how much i should accept off them?

 

here is the backstory. I bought the tv in may 2008, and paid £1407 for it. the model is a 47" 7603d. I am paying for the tv via finance and have around £1100 left to pay. The tv developed a fault early march and was picked up on the 12th march.

 

How long should you epect a lcd to last for?

 

If for instance its expected to last 5 years then by my reckoning:

£1407(cost) / 60 months(lifespan) *10(actual life) = £234 off what i paid

 

which is £1173

 

Would this be a fair amount to expect to have back of them? Any less and i'll still owe money to the finance people! I'm expecting them to come in with a stupid offer at irst but intend to push them for as much as i can. Has anyone had to deal with a case like this before?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect philips to replace it; for there reputations sake and would indeed ask for that first before accepting any refund!

only ten months old defo ask for full refund or replacement; but this should directed at the dealer? television faulty, philips have proved that.

I would say they would last about 8-10 years. lamp can go sooner but you can replace those for about £80.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont give up with philips ( they really are crap products though had DVD players and set top boxs just dont last at all ) though ask for full replacement, they offer manufacturers warranty dont they! to replace or repair? not partial refund thats the dealers normal response. tell them you post adverse comments on cosumer websites etc. when you should praising their brilliant after sales care and service!

Link to post
Share on other sites

the retailer was brighthouse, after reading stories on here I thought philips would be the safer bet.

 

so, general opinion is I should hold out for full refund? I know they're gonna come in with a ridiculous offer at first, but am prepared for small claims court if they take the mick. just don't want this to drag on for ages, its been 7 weeks just to get this far!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The remedy is up to the seller to decide under SOGA. So they are within their rights to offer a partial refund. However, I'm assuming that the TV is on HP so SOGA doesn't apply, your rights are found under the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973. From memory, the rights are the same, but it would be best to check.

 

You should let the finance company know what is happening as they are, after all, the owners of the TV. You do not own it until you make the last payment. It is really up to them to decide. But bear in mind, if you don't like what they say, you can complain to the Ombudsman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The remedy is up to the seller to decide under SOGA. So they are within their rights to offer a partial refund.

 

However, Philips are not the seller, so SOGA doesn't apply to them.

 

All that Philips are liable for is their own warranty/guarantee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...