Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeeeeees! Well done on your victory!  👏
    • Hearing held today in court. I attended in person and Evri had an advocate attend on their behalf to defend their position that my contract is with Packlink and not with them. I also provided a copy of Evri's terms and conditions which explains that a contract is entered into when a parcel is sent with Evri. The judge pointed this out to the Advocate and agreed there is a contract between me and Evri under the Ts and Cs. The judge explained that while Packlink are responsible for organising the delivery of the item, it is Evri who are responsible for handling the goods and delivering them, and therefor Evri has a responsibility to handle the goods with reasonable care and skill. So am pleased to say the judge found in my favour. Hearing lasted about 75mins. Evri has been ordered to make payment within 21 days. Also nice to meet @jk2054 in person.
    • Good morning,    I just wanted to update you on the situation.    I have visits piling up with my current employment and they need doing before I finish at the end of this month.  I am moving to Wiltshire in 3 weeks for a new job helping care homes with their Dementia patients. I tried to work it out and at a guess I will be doing about 20-25,000 miles a year. So need a vehicle that can cope with that mileage, my old car would have done it easy but 🤷‍♂️ I have taken out a loan and got a friend to find me a reliable car that can cope with the miles and hasn't been written off in the past.   I phoned Adrian flux to see if I could use the last months insurance on a new car I have bought, the girl I spoke to phoned Markerstudy and asked them but they said no, my new car doesn't have any modifications.    I had an email from someone who saw one of my appeals for information, they live near the site of the accident and know a nearby farmer who has a security camera at his entrance that catches the traffic and specifically registration plates as he has been robbed before. They said they would reach out for me and see if he still has the data. Unfortunately it wont catch the scene of the crash.   The Police phoned me and said they were closing the report I made, even if they found footage of the vehicle at the time I said the actual incident would be my word vs theirs.  My first response was I am sure google maps would show that they turned around at that location which would verify my version of events, but upon reflection I do understand, I have seen people doing make up with both hands while driving, eating from a bowl steering with their knees and veering all over the place. I am sure some of these people go off the road and claim that someone forced them off.    Markerstudy phoned me yesterday to say that my car is now at Copart, the £80 tank of Vpower diesel was emptied on entry to the site for safety reasons, which I get but it sucks.  It is awaiting being assessed and shouldn't be too long, which is a relief.  I am really glad things do not seem to be going the way of the other stories and they seem to moving quickly.   However I was informed that my car was a structural write off before I bought it - this destroyed me, I was almost sick.  and this is going to affect any offer of money - after hearing the first statement this didn't affect me.   They need to wait for the assessor to check it over but it is highly likely to be written off and the maximum they can offer is £2300.  I was desperate for a car as I was working for an agency at the time, no work no pay, and did not do a vehicle check because I didn't know about them.  The seller did not tell me that it had been structurally written off, he told me that it had the front wing damaged while parked and was repaired at an approved repairer.  Markerstudy records state that it was sold at auction, no record of repair at an approved repairer.  I bought it bank transfer with hand written receipt.    It gets worse.    It turns out my airbags should of gone off. For some reason they are not working. I think we can figure out why.  If I had hit that car head on and had no airbags.    Some good news.    I can arrange a time with Copart to go and take my stereo equipment and any personal items that are left in the car only. I cant live without music and need quality sound, my speakers and amps are Hertz and JLaudio, (no I am not a boy racer with booming subs, I am an audiophile on a budget) I was really worried I wouldn't get them back so this is a huge relief for me. It is stuff I have built up over years of saving and collecting. Everything to do with the vehicle and mods I have declared need to stay to be assessed.   The accident has gone as a fault on my record, I have to remove 2 years NCB which means I still have some to declare which is good.  So it appears at this point that it may be resolved quickly, not in the way I was hoping, but not as bad as I presumed it was going to be based upon that tow truck drivers attitude and behaviour and the horror stories I read.   I am not going to buy the car back and try to make money with all the parts on it, I don't have the time or energy.   I may need an xray on my back and neck.  The whole situation has left me feeling physically sick, drained and I need it done.   The lesson learnt from this  -  My conscience is 100% clear, my attitude to safety and strong sense of personal responsibility - A rated tyres even if on credit card, brake fluid flush every year, regular checks of pads and discs, bushes etc, made avoiding what I believed to be a certain broadside collision possible.   Get a dashcam (searching now for the best I can afford at the moment)  -  Research your insurance company before you buy  -  Pay for total car check before you go and see a car and take someone with you if you are not confident in your ability to assess a vehicle.      Thank you to everyone here who volunteers their time, energy and information, it is greatly appreciated.  You helped my sister with some advice a while ago but we weren't able to follow through, she is struggling with long term health conditions and I ended up in hospital for a while with myocarditis, when I got out and remembered it was too late.  I am going to make a donation now, it is not a lot, I wish I could give more, I will try to come back when things are on a more even keel.    Take care
    • It seems the solicitor has got your case listed for this “appeal” but not for the Stat Dec(SD). You need to ensure you can perform your SD on the day. If you are able to make your SD in court, the situation you are in now is more straightforward than if you made your SD via a solicitor. You have been convicted of two offences (and two were dropped) via proceedings of which you were not aware. The way to remedy that is to perform an SD. No appeal is necessary (nor is it available via the magistrates’ court). If you are able to make your SD this is how I see it panning out: You will make your SD to the court. The court must allow you to make it as it will have been made within 21 days of you discovering your convictions. You will then be asked to enter pleas to the four charges again. At this point you should plead not guilty to all four but make the court aware that you will plead guilty to the speeding charges on the condition that the FtP charges are dropped. The prosecutor will be asked whether or not this is agreed. In my opinion the overwhelming likelihood is that it will be. If it is you will be sentenced for the two speeding offences under the normal guidelines. In the unlikely event it is not accepted,  the speeding charges will be withdrawn (they have no evidence you were driving). You have no viable defence to the FtP charges and so should plead guilty. This will mean 12 points and a “totting up” ban (as you have already suffered). You can present an “Exceptional Hardship” argument to try to avoid this (explained below).   Because of this, I don’t see any need to make an argument to ask to have any ban suspended (pending an appeal to the Crown Court) unless and until you are banned again. The only reason I can think the solicitor suggested this is to secure a (Magistrates')  court date. I was surprised when you said you had an appointment so quickly; a date for an SD usually takes longer than that. However, if you can use it to your advantage, all well and good. I can’t comment on the argument that the two speeding offences were committed “on the same occasion” as I don’t have the details. That phrase is not defined anywhere and is a matter for the court to decide. It’s an interesting thought (and only that) that such an argument could equally be made for the two FtP offences. If the requests for driver’s details arrived at your old address at the same time, with the same deadline for reply, it could be argued that you failed to respond to hem both “on the same occasion” (i.e when the 28 days to respond expired) and so should only receive penalty points for one. Hopefully you won’t need to go there. I think you have information about avoiding a “totting up” ban. But here’s the magistrates’ latest guidance on "Exceptional Hardship" (EH) which they refer to: When considering whether there are grounds to reduce or avoid a totting up disqualification the court should have regard to the following: It is for the offender to prove to the civil standard of proof that such grounds exist. Other than very exceptionally, this will require evidence from the offender, and where such evidence is given, it must be sworn. Where it is asserted that hardship would be caused, the court must be satisfied that it is not merely inconvenience, or hardship, but exceptional hardship for which the court must have evidence; Almost every disqualification entails hardship for the person disqualified and their immediate family. This is part of the deterrent objective of the provisions combined with the preventative effect of the order not to drive. If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can take this circumstance into account. Courts should be cautious before accepting assertions of exceptional hardship without evidence that alternatives (including alternative means of transport) for avoiding exceptional hardship are not viable; Loss of employment will be an inevitable consequence of a driving ban for many people. Evidence that loss of employment would follow from disqualification is not in itself sufficient to demonstrate exceptional hardship; whether or not it does will depend on the circumstances of the offender and the consequences of that loss of employment on the offender and/or others. I must say, I still do not understand what the solicitor means by “As a safeguard we have lodged the appeal and applied to suspend your ban pending appeal due to the time limit for being able to automatically appeal without getting leave of the Judge.” When they speak of “leave of the judge” I assume they mean they have lodged an appeal with the Crown Court. I don’t know what for or why they would do this. It seems to follow on from their explanation of the “totting up” ban. If so, I’m surprised that the Crown Court has accepted an appeal against something that has not yet happened. But as I said, i is no clear to me. Only you can decide whether to employ your solicitor to represent you in court. If it was me I would not because there is nothing he can say that you cannot say yourself. However, I am fairly knowledgeable of the process and confident I can deal with it. That said, I do have a feeling that the solicitor is somewhat “over egging the pudding” by introducing such things as appeals to the Crown Court which, in all honesty, you can deal with if they are required. I can only say that the process you will attempt to employ is by no means unusual and all court users will be familiar with it. I can also say that I have only ever heard of one instance where it was refused. In summary, it is my view that it is very unlikely that your offer to do the deal will be refused. If it is accepted, you may be able to persuade he court that the two speeding offences occurred "on the same occasion" and so should only receive one lot of points. Let me know the details (timings, places, etc) and I'll give you my opinion. Just in case your offer is refused, you should have your EH argument ready. Whether it's worth paying what will amount to many hundreds of pounds to pay someone to see this through is your call.  Let me know if I can help further.    
  • 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

Digimate (DGM) Monitors


Neonin
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4604 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

:!:

 

It is far from clear that this is correct

 

The 'burden of proof' falls with the Consumer to justify their complaint and disprove the Trader/Company's comments or position.

in view of this from the EU Directive 1999/44/EC:

 

3. Unless proved otherwise, any lack of conformity which becomes apparent within six months of delivery of the goods shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery unless this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

However, the question remains of whether or not an obvious fault would not be immediately evident at the time of delivery, so could not have existed at the time of delivery because of the month it took to "develop".

 

At the end of the day then, you probably would need an independent report (at least) to win the claim.

 

:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It's definately the backlight if it's anything like mine....

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]25088[/ATTACH]

 

I'm curious to see that photo, how long does it take before an attatchment gets approved?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just received a telephone call from a representative at DGM, offering to collect the monitor to be tested after all. However, they say that if it does turn out to be "customer damage" then they would of course have to charge me for any repairs.

 

The problem I now have, and I was perfectly honest with the person on the phone, is that with all the hassle and lies that have gone on with this company I simply do not trust them to test the unit independantly. It would be in their financial interest in more ways than one to claim it as customer damage, even though I'd have no way of knowing whether they even bothered to look at it.

 

I asked them for a little time to consider and have emailed Trading Standards for advice, but I'd be interested to know what the opinion of people here is too. Do I accept DGM at their word and arrange collection? Or would it be better to get the unit independantly tested and then, assuming it is a manufacturing fault, claim the cost back from them in addition to getting the monitor repaired? Can I even do that after they've offered to pick it up and test it themselves?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An independent assessment will likely cost you £50.

Although I have a rational deep seated mistrust of some of the "most respected" brands and trading names and agree with your worries that once they have it they can say what they want, I can only see one or two ways forward for you.

1) Send it in and have the fault analysed, stipulate that if it is as you aver a manufacturing defect then a repair/replacement is in order BUT if they assert that this fault is caused by the customer then they are to return the unit unrepaired with a signed statement to that effect and a copy of the report diagnosis sheet for you to pass on to an independent tester.

2) Don't agree to pay a repair unless it is capped as a new screen for a £129 monitor may be chargeable at £150 by the manufacturer.

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Jasper, I used your suggestions while on the phone to the Trading Standards Officer who's dealing with my complaint today. He is sending DGM an email today regarding their offer, as soon as he/I get a reply I shall continue to update you all on the progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so first the letter from TS to DGM:

 

Dear *****,

 

I refer to the existing complaint concerning the above. Please note that the reason for Mr Jenkins delay in contacting you was a result of an illness and also that he wished to discuss the recent complaint developments with Wolverhampton Trading Standards Service.

 

Mr Jenkins informs me that he was contacted by a representative of your Company (******) offering to arrange a collection and assessment of the monitor in question.****** informed Mr Jenkins that if the monitor is found to be faulty; a free of charge repair will be arranged but should the monitor show signs of customer misuse or damage then a chargeable repair will be actioned.

 

Taking these recent developments into account and the lack of faith Mr Jenkins has in your Company when considering the complaint history, I have advised him to consider the commission of an independent inspection to confirm the nature of the monitor fault. Should the report to be in Mr Jenkins favour he will seek reimbursement for the cost of the report from your Company and an immediate replacement. If you have any objections to this course of action please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

I look forward to receiving your comments within 7 days. If no response is received I will advise Mr Jenkins to arrange the independent inspection without further delay.

 

Yours sincerely

 

******

Consumer Advice Officer

Trading Standards Service

Wolverhampton City Council

DGM then got back to TS without bothering to copy me in on it:

 

Good afternoon ******,

Unfortunately we are unable to offer any reimbursement or compensation under the manufacturer’s warranty.

 

We can arrange to have the unit collected for assessment, if there proves to be a manufacturing defect then we will repair free of charge. If the fault proves to be a result of damage or misuse then we will contact the customer and offer a chargeable repair. If they do not wish to have a chargeable repair then we will return the unit to them.

 

Kind Regards

 

******

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

Then TS replied:

 

Dear ******,

Thank you for your email concerning Mr Jenkin's complaint, the content of which is noted..

 

Irrespective of whether the manufacturers warranty does not offer the facility of reimbursement for independent reports Mr Jenkin's can still seek the cost of the report from your Company.

Mr Jenkins entered into a contract with your Company who sold him the monitor not the manufacturer. His contract with your Company is governed by the Sales of Goods Act 1979 and has statutory rights for up to 6 years.

 

Our Trading Standards Service have advised Mr Jenkins to consider commissioning an independent report as the photographic evidence submitted to our offices show no signs of cosmetic damage, impact or distress. My investigations have also confirmed that the faults as described by Mr Jenkins and suggested by the photographs of the item could possibly be a screen backlight failure which is a common component failure with monitors. You will note that my expertise do not lie in monitor fault diagnosis and therefore have requested that Mr Jenkins seek an independent report to confirm the fault. The report will also comment on the condition of the monitor prior to delivery which will also confirm if the monitor is damaged in transit.

 

I look forward to your comments concerning the above.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

******

Consumer Advice Officer

Trading Standards Service

Wolverhampton City Council

At this point I emailed TS to point out that I'd had a phone conversation with the people I actually bought the monitor off (eBuyer) and that they said it was their understanding that since DGM replaced the monitor it is no longer their responsibility to deal with the issue under SOGA, as it's not the unit they supplied me that is at fault. Then they sent the following, this time copying me in on it:

 

Good afternoon ******,

 

This is not correct. We are the manufacturer’s warranty repair centre, and we did not sell the unit to the customer. Therefore we are unable to offer the customer reimbursement for an independent report.

 

As stated below, if our engineers confirm there is a manufacturing defect with the unit then we will repair the unit free of charge.

 

Kind Regards

 

******

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

I'm now waiting to see what TS replies, I'm guessing the officer dealing with it has now gone off to research whether DGM or eBuyer is responsible for dealing with this. All fun eh?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The warranty is an addition to your rights and does not absolve eBuyer of their duty to provide a resolution to your statutory rights so you could chose either as they both should be aiming for the same result. Goods that work and that the consumer is satisfied with. The only botch I see is with eBuyer and DGM passing ther buck . TS have acted as would be expected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wolverhampton Trading Standards Service appear to have failed to tell the difference between the person who sold the goods and the warranty repair centre, with regard to the legislation to apply.

 

What is that, if not a botch?

Edited by perplexity
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the advice of TS I've just arranged for DGM to pick up the monitor for testing on monday. Will be interesting to see how long it takes them, it better not be another 80 working days like last time! Will update you all when I hear something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, have you bothered to read ANYTHING properly? Here, let me spell it out for you so you can understand. The person I've been dealing with by email:

 

Harriet

DGM Customer Services

 

Tel: 0871 250 8000

Fax: 0870 495 8234

Email: harriet.colvin@repairtech .co.uk

 

Better?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticing that the replies to Trading Standards declared themselves as

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

:?:

 

I looked them up at Companies House.

 

Did you?

 

Repairtech:

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/repairtech

 

DGM UK Limited:

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/dgm-uk

 

P.S.

 

If the warranty was granted by DGM, you need to address yourself primarily to them at

 

Unit 1, Chancery Gate Business Centre

Stonefield Way

Ruislip

HA4 0JA

 

with the correspondence copied to Repairtech.

 

If you are lucky there might be somebody there who was taught to read English.

Edited by perplexity
P.S.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I found the information here very useful.

 

i too had problems with my DGM L-2362 monitor when a backlight failed just over a year after I purchased it.

 

No problem I thought, they give a 3 year warranty.

 

I returned the Monitor to my Retailer and DGM agreed to repair it under the terms of the warranty agreement, 7 - 10 days they said, great I thought.

 

Then I waited......and waited..............and waited.

 

 

Phone calls by the Retailer to DGM got the same response each time '7 - 10 days'.

 

emails went unanswered.

 

My retailer gave me the reference number for the repair job and the contact details for DGM, they acknowledged my email and then nothing happened.

 

I emailed again same reponse, same result.

 

Finally I sent a letter, by recorded delivery, giving them 7 days to return my Monitor in working order or I would take the matter to the Smalls Claims Court .

 

SUCCESS! My retailer rang me to say the monitor was back, let us hope it keeps on working.

 

I am aware things can and do go wrong, but a measure of a Company is how they deal with problems that occur, on this score DGM are very poor and I will not be giving them any repeat business or recommending them to any of my friends and family.

 

A copy of my letter (with personal details removed) is included if it helps anyone else in the future who may have a similar problem with DGM.

 

You can also contact them on 020 8839 2285 instead of their expensive premium rate 0871 number.

 

 

DGM (UK) Ltd.,

Digimate House,

1 Chancery Gate Business Centre,

Stonefield Way,

Ruislip,

London.

HA4 0HA

 

**** March 2011

 

 

 

 

Reference: DGH *******

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

My Computer Monitor, a DGM L-2362WD, was returned to you, via my Retailer, ****** Computing, for a Warranty repair. You acknowledged that your company received my Monitor on **** February 2011. Since then, despite repeated telephone calls and emails, from ****** Computing and myself, I have been without my Monitor. Neither has there been any feedback or contact to confirm a possible date of return.

 

I am disappointed, nay appalled, at the lack of progress on this problem.

 

You have now had my monitor for 23 days, ample time for any competent engineer to inspect, diagnose and repair or replace.

 

I have discussed this issue with Trading Standards.

 

Please be advised that time is now of the essence and I expect this matter to be resolved within 7 days by one of the following options:-

 

1. I am to receive my original monitor, properly repaired and fully functioning.

 

2. I receive a fully functioning replacement monitor, of equal or greater quality and value to the original.

 

3. A refund to allow me to purchase a replacement monitor of my own choice.

 

If I do not achieve a satisfactory resolution within the time period stated then I will have no other recourse than to submit a claim via the Small Claims Court and make a written complaint to Trading Standards regarding your failure to deal with this matter in a timely manner.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Milo.

 

Another quick update, TS emailed me on monday to ask if there'd been any progress since the monitor was collected. I replied in the negative, as I had heard nothing out of DGM by then. TS then emailed DGM and received a reply the day after saying the unit was "with the engineers" and DGM would get back to them when they knew something.

 

I wonder how much longer this will drag out...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Neonin,

 

For what it is worth, I spent over 20 years in a Customer Service environment as an Advisor/Manager/Training Manager.

 

Customers who became angry/threatening/abusive got very little assistance.

 

Those customers, who had a genuine grievance, were assertive, but polite, got their issues resolved fairly rapidly.

 

The biggest failing with with Companies/Service staff is that other customers, the ones who were qquiet and patient, often ended up at the back of the queue, not deliberately, but because it is human nature, staff would deal with the urgent cases and others would be put aside to wait until they had time and, unfortunately become forgotten, gathering dust metaphorically speaking.

 

Be assertive, know your rights, don't be fobbed off.

 

Tell them:-

 

a) What the problem is

b) State what has happened so far and what you have done

c) What you expect them to do

d) Give a reasonable deadline to achieve a resolution

e) State what will happen if they fail

 

Above all be factual and accurate.

 

Always keep records of who/what/where/time/date and what was said, email or Royal mail (recorded delivery, so they cannot deny receiving a letter).

 

If it reaches the stage where you do have to go to the Small Claims Court to get a resolution, the cost of phone calls, letters and Court fees are added to the claim so when you get a judgement in your favour all your costs are reimbursed. Courts like facts, the more the better.

 

I hope you get this sorted soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now got my monitor back after nearly two months. Too late. I bought another one and am proceeding with a case in the small claims court. I called them up and emailed them to say if I didn't get my monitor back within 7 days I was going to start legal action, after the 7 days, I then emailed them to say I had started legal action. A day later I got a phone call telling me my monitor would be delivered the next. Strange that.

Anyways, I had bought a new monitor as I couldn't wait 2 months for a repair so I'm proceeding wit the court case. What a Sh**ty company, shi**ty product and shi**ty service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"What a Sh**ty company, shi**ty product and shi**ty service."

 

Sorry Carlos, I have to disagree with that.............

 

 

 

'Sh**ty' is far too mild an epithet to describe the service and products provided by DGM!:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday was four working weeks since the monitor arrived at DGM and just under two weeks since the reply we got saying the monitor was "with the engineers", and surprise surprise I still have not heard anything. I emailed TS about it and they sent off another query today asking for an update. Their reply should be interesting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And eargerly-awaited reply, received yesterday, was:

 

Good afternoon,

 

I will request an update from engineering.

 

Kind Regards

 

***

 

DGM

Customer Services

I wonder how long it'll take now for a proper reply...
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tradings Standards emailed them again today to request another update since it's been 5 weeks now, and received the following reply:

 

Good morning ******,

The unit has been tested by our engineers and they discovered a part is required to complete the repair which I am afraid we do not have in stock. We have ordered an inverter from head office and as soon as stock is available it will be shipped to us and the repair will be completed.

Kind Regards

***

DGM

Customer Services

 

I take that to mean it wasn't customer damage as they tried to fob me off with after all, but if I hadn't got TS in they'd probably have never accepted the unit back for testing. I sent an email to the guy I'm dealing with at TS to ask how long with give them because although it's a different part this is exactly the same thing they said last time and it still took months before I got a new monitor!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with labrat, looking at the pattern it's the backlight or just possibly the inverter it's pretty obvious and easy to spot for anyone who deals with these issues suggest they are simply trying to pass the buck.

 

What kind of fools does this company employ? We can diagnose the fault from a picture on the internet, a one second voltage check across the inverter output would have confirmed what was obvious from the outset in fact if you had simply described the symptoms we'd have come to the same prognosis.

 

With the unit in front of you it would take no more than five minutes to assess, diagnose and confirm this fault, why it took five weeks is beyond me.

 

(Assuming of course that the person charged with doing this had a fundamental level of training which in my experience they simply do not).

 

It's always the customer who suffers because they all too often attempt to baffle the unwitting customer with pseudo electronic terminology and excuses to hide the incompetence of the board swappers.

 

Well done for plugging away at them.

 

 

 

ps Yes by confirming the inverter needs replaced they have admitted the fault is a manufacturers part and not customer damage. If it's the following part number IV185030HX I could get one for tuesday (and I'm not trade) , surprised they don't carry stock as this is a common failure point, no need for an extended wait now IMO.

Edited by Jasper1965
  • Confused 1

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that reply Jasper, that was a very interesting read!

 

Considering this is the second unit I've had go back in the ongoing saga and with TS involved, I was amazed it took them 5 weeks to let us know what the fault was. I've sent my contact at TS your views to keep them informed and it will be interesting to see how long it takes before we have to start shooting off more emails to get this sorted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...