Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What type of finance is it?   HP, PCP, Loan? They want her to ring so they can bully her into making payments she can't afford...unless she can record her calls then IMHO, I'd keep everything in writing. Is £400 SSP her only income? There's no chance they will justify taking half of that.   Lodge a formal complaint with them ASAP, exhaust it, and then you can escalate it sooner rather than later, ruddy sharks!  
    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Laptop broken 1 month out of warranty


soma
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6346 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 have an Acer 5021 laptop from ebuyer.com bought last august. The laptop now has a problem with the screen going blank and stopping responding effectively rendering the laptop unusable. I know it comes with a 1 year warranty but i am now on 13 months so is it possible to have it fixed by ACER?

 

Anyone in the UK know where i stand legally with regards to a laptop developing a hardware fault just out of warranty. It would seem to me that its not fit for purpose if it breaks so soon. Do you think the sale of goods act or any relevant legislation would apply? I also think EU legislation will apply.

 

I find it interesting then that many manufacturers only supply a default 1 year warranty. I suppose they reckon that most people cannot be bothered going to the effort of arguing their case with them.

Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees

 

Article 3

 

Rights of the consumer

 

1. The seller shall be liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists at the time the goods were delivered.

 

2. In the case of a lack of conformity, the consumer shall be entitled to have the goods brought into conformity free of charge by repair or replacement, in accordance with paragraph 3, or to have an appropriate reduction made in the price or the contract rescinded with regard to those goods, in accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6.

 

Article 5

 

Time limits

 

1. The seller shall be held liable under Article 3 where the lack of conformity becomes apparent within two years as from delivery of the goods. If, under national legislation, the rights laid down in Article 3(2) are subject to a limitation period, that period shall not expire within a period of two years from the time of delivery.

 

EUR-Lex - 31999L0044 - EN

 

Now if i have a case under the sale of goods act or EU Law, how do i go about getting acer to accept responsibilty.

 

Should i approach ebuyer.com as the seller (they have very poor customer service i believe) or go direct to the manufacturer Acer?

 

Acer only supply a premuim rate contact number for out of warranty repairs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so i will write a letter to ebuyer.com quoting sale of goods act and asking for either repair / refund / replacement and if they disagree i will issue a small claims for the £760 it cost.

 

The only thing i am worried about is (from DTI website http://www.dti.gov.uk/consumers/Fact%20Sheets/page24700.html)

 

What does the "reversed burden of proof" mean for the consumer?

 

It means that for the first six months the consumer need not produce any evidence that a product was inherently faulty at the time of sale. If a consumer is seeking any other remedy the burden of proof remains with him/her.

In such a case, the retailer will either accept there was an inherent fault, and will offer a remedy, or he will dispute that it was inherently flawed. If the latter, when he inspects the product to analyse the cause, he may, for example, point out impact damage or stains that would be consistent with it having been mistreated in such a way as to bring about the fault.

This reversal of the usual burden of proof only applies when the consumer is seeking a repair or replacement. After the first six months the onus of proof is again on the consumer.

 

 

If the onus of proof is on the consumer, ie me, then how can i prove the product was faulty at time of sale. If it is due to the laptop overheating then i dont see how it can not be a design flaw but proving this in court would seem to be impossible! In effect does this not mean that our "rights" under the sale of goods act only extend for effectively 6 months?

trans.giftrans.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

The manufacturer's warranty is in addition to your statutory rights, not instead of them.

 

Goods must be of reasonable quality and fit for the purpose. It is not reasonable for a laptop to stop working after just over a year.

 

Your complaint is with ebuyer, not Acer, so you need to contact them.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing I forgot to add, i bought the goods under a credit agreement (which is now paid off) would i have any extra rights or be able to claim against the credit company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In what way do you have a claim against the credit company? Have they charged you for late payments etc?

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In what way do you have a claim against the credit company? Have they charged you for late payments etc?

No sorry, I took out a buy now pay later (9 months) agreement with able2buy arranged through ebuyer. I paid off the full amount after 9 months, with no charges or interest.

 

I saw this (Buying goods - your rights)

Making a claim against a credit company

 

If you paid for your goods by credit, you may be able to make a claim against the credit company, instead of the trader. The goods must have cost more than £100 and less than £30,000. This can be useful where the trader has gone out of business or has no money to compensate you.

 

 

I wonder if this still applies after the agreement has been repaid.

 

PS ebuyer.com T&C's are here (ebuyer.com)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This can be useful where the trader has gone out of business or has no money to compensate you.

 

But you said you were claiming of ebuyer who are, as far as I am aware, still trading.

 

Why can't you take it up with them?

Why don't you think they will have the money to compensate you?

Have they gone out of business?

 

I'm really confused as to where the credit company come into all this and why you feel you have some sort of claim against them.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But you said you were claiming of ebuyer who are, as far as I am aware, still trading.

 

Why can't you take it up with them?

Why don't you think they will have the money to compensate you?

Have they gone out of business?

 

I'm really confused as to where the credit company come into all this and why you feel you have some sort of claim against them.

The only reason i thought of involving the credit company is to get a faster response eg if the credit company put pressure on ebuyer they will be more willing to address the issue. ebuyer have very cheap prices due to their almost complete lack of customer service. After reading of other peoples dealings with them (and based on some of my own) i would expect them to

 

A) ignore the problem

B) deny all responsiblity

C) tell me to contact the supplier

D) and generally have very poor CS

E) only do anything when they absolutely had to

 

i know this may be unfair to ebuyer, so i will update here how they respond, hope i am proved wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they try and fob you off then ultimately it will result in you issuing proceedings against them - this will get the message through to them and they won't be able to fob you off any more.

 

Your complaint is with ebuyer - not the manufacturer, and not the credit provider.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there.

Regarding the credit company, I think you can only claim against them if you are still paying for the goods (I believe under section 75 of the Consumer credit act).

However, as it has been settled in full you will have to go to the merchant , who in this case is Ebuyer.

It is the sellers, not the manufacturers responsibility to ensure goods are fit for the purpose.

Sometimes, just a strongly worded letter stating the sale of goods act (I enclosed a printout of key points of the act highlighted from the DTI website) and how it applies to your case can sometimes be sufficient.

Have a look on my thread regarding a tumble dryer problem and how quick and easy it was resolved with a letter to the retailers that I bought it from.

If you would like a copy of the letter that I sent then just PM me.

All the best!

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Barclays - £268 - Moneyclaim

Capital One - £172 - Moneyclaim

Abbey (2nd claim) - Moneyclaim

---------------------------------------------------

 

HSBC - £2164.46- PAID IN FULL

MBNA - £471 - PAID IN FULL

NatWest - £307 - PAID IN FULL

Abbey Business - £314.15 - PAID IN FULL

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing I forgot to add, i bought the goods under a credit agreement (which is now paid off) would i have any extra rights or be able to claim against the credit company?

 

They might try & tell you different but yes you do under sec 75 of the CCA. The fact that you have paid them off does not negate their liabilty/responsibilty under the act. They have equal status with the seller.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Have sent this off to ebuyer

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

I purchased an Acer Aspire 5021WLMi Laptop (QuickFind 90575) from your ebuyer.com store on 11/08/05.

 

This item has recently developed a fault with the display which renders the laptop unusable and which been quoted as costing hundreds of pounds to repair, for a notebook computer which cost only £760 to purchase.

 

For a machine that cost £760 I feel the cost of repair is grossly disproportionate to the price that I paid for the unit.

 

I did not purchase an extended warranty as goods should last a reasonable amount of time as according to The Sale of Goods Act 1979.

 

I enclose a copy of the relevant parts of the act from the Department for Trade and Industries own web site and highlighted the relevant parts.

 

This to me is an unacceptable as a consumer who has purchased this in good faith.

 

I understand that not having an extra guarantee does not mean that the seller has no responsibility after the guarantee period has expired and may I point you in the direction of the DTI website and as mentioned, I have printed out a copy for your reference.

 

I have followed their advice and am now writing to you to claim for a cost of repair under provision of the Sale of Goods act.

 

I would respectfully request a reply within fourteen working days.

 

Yours Sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act if the sum was over £100 you DO have a claim against the credit supplier & you MUST notify them of your claim against the dealer at the same time otherwise they will claim you have prejudiced their position by not advising them of your intentions & giving them an opportunity to try & resolve matters by intervening with their client on your behalf.

 

Although they might try & tell you different this still applies even if the finance is settled. You will also, provided the deposit was over £100, have a claim if you used a credit card against the credit card company. In short you would have 3 places to seek recourse. The dealer & the finance suppliers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi there.

Regarding the credit company, I think you can only claim against them if you are still paying for the goods (I believe under section 75 of the Consumer credit act).

However, as it has been settled in full you will have to go to the merchant , who in this case is Ebuyer.

It is the sellers, not the manufacturers responsibility to ensure goods are fit for the purpose.

Sometimes, just a strongly worded letter stating the sale of goods act (I enclosed a printout of key points of the act highlighted from the DTI website) and how it applies to your case can sometimes be sufficient.

Have a look on my thread regarding a tumble dryer problem and how quick and easy it was resolved with a letter to the retailers that I bought it from.

If you would like a copy of the letter that I sent then just PM me.

All the best!

 

The finance company is liable under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act even if the finance is settled. Liablity is only limited be the Statute of Limitations (6 years).

Link to post
Share on other sites

ebuyer have sent a letter in response.

 

It basically says sorry for any inconvenience or distress I may have suffered, but it then states that ebuyer.com only offer a 1 year warranty on goods.

 

It also says that if I was to claim under the sale of goods act 1979 (as amended) for the laptop being not fit for purpose due to an inherent fault that it will be my responsibility to prove that fault existed at the time of sale as 6 months has passed. So they say there is nothing they can do.

 

So ebuyer's stance is that they only offer refund/repair to item's less than 6 months old and they only repair goods less than a year old.

 

This in effect means that ebuyer never take responsibility for any goods as the manufacturer offers a 1 year warranty and if it breaks down in this time they say send it to the manufacturer and if its out the 1 year warranty, then that’s hard luck as 6 months has passed.

 

Any suggestions as to what to do next?

 

I think I will send a letter back saying that any warranty cannot negate my statutory rights as they are well aware. I will give full details of the fault and how I am confident that it is due to a design / manufacturing fault.

 

Basically the fault it that after half an hour or so the laptop overheats, display goes blank and it crashes. I have replicated this by reimaging the laptop back to its default software environment with the manufacturer’s supplied CDs so the problem must be with the hardware.

 

I will point out that they are liable for the fault and tell them I will take them to court in (14 days?).

 

One thing is I live in Scotland but they are registered in England and under their t&c

 

13. Governing Law and Jurisdiction

These terms of sale and the supply of the goods will be subject to English law and the English courts will have jurisdiction in respect of any dispute arising from the contract.

 

Can I still sue them in Scotland? Is this an unfair clause by forcing customers not in england to travel to england to raise court action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can issue proceedings in Scotland & serve out of jurisdiction.

 

The English & Scottish Courts don't like clauses of jurisdiction.

 

As you made the purchase in Scotland that court will have jurisdiction despite what their T&C's claim.

 

Tell them that as they refuse to repair the laptop which is only just over 1 year old you WILL rely on the protection afforded by the Sale of Goods Act 1974.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats excellent, cheers for the help. I have found a company that will examine the laptop for £25 to find out whats wrong. Hopefully they will say the flaw was present at manufacturing and I will add the £25 if i have to take them to court!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My reply to ebuyer

 

Thank you for your response. On the subject of Ebuyer UK Ltd only offering a 1 year warranty I am sure you are aware that any guarantee cannot negate the statutory protection afforded by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended).

 

As such, and as you refuse to repair the laptop which is only just over 1 year old I WILL rely on the protection afforded by section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended).

 

The problem with the laptop is that the screen blanks and the computer crashes after 30 min to 1 hours use. I have returned the software environment to its supplied condition using the manufacturer restore discs and I am using the default drivers supplied. As such the problem is not a software error but a hardware problem. It is my belief that the laptop is overheating leading to problems in the graphics subsystem.

 

This renders the laptop unusable, it is not fit for purpose and it is of an unsatisfactory quality. With regard to the reversed burden of proof in the sale of goods act, I am confident that a judge will find in my favour. It is my intention therefore to raise court action against Ebuyer UK Ltd if you are not willing to address the issue.

 

I would respectfully request a reply within fourteen working days or court action will commence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...