Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

Asking too much for repair? - laptop faulty


TeeSee
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4629 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 laptop in June 2010 online from a well known manufacturer and it failed 2 months out of warranty.

I got a local repair centre to take a look and they diagnosed a motherboard failure. I was told the cost of the repair could approach the original cost of the laptop and therefore would be uneconomical to repair.

They suggested I spoke with the manufacturer to see if they would be prepared to offer a 'good will' gesture to help toward the cost of repair since it has only just gone out of warranty and the failure was a major event.

I spoke with their escalations team who've kindly agreed to waive the £55.15 courier and assessment fee, but I'm told the repair will be fully charegable. This doesn't help me much as I know already what the fault is and what the costs' likely to be.

I understand the manufacturer is perfectly within their rights to charge the full amount for the repair once it's outside the warranty period, but for the price I've paid and the fact it's failed just outside, plus the fact that the motherboard should last a lot longer that this and in my (and the repair company's) opinion is not 'fit for purpose'

I paid £550 for the laptop and as a consumer don't expect to pay another £550 every 14 months or so to replace it 'ad nauseum'.

I was hoping for a bit more help toward the cost of the repair something like 50% of the cost would be nice.

What's your opinions, am I asking too much, Is it worth pursuing, or do I just chuck the thing away and chalk it up to experience.

Cheers in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

I can't answer your question directly, but I would be extemely fed up if this happened to me. I shall be interested to see what the experts here think about a computer that you and I would think wasn't 'fit for purpose'. I think it's called saleable quality under the Sale of Goods Act and I wonder how long that should apply for in your case.

 

You certainly don't buy a laptop expecting to have to replace it the next year, do you?

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

good morning

 

your 'beef' is with the shop that sold it under SOGA

 

nothing to do with any warranty or manu.

 

go get 'em

 

if its failed within say 3yrs

then its NOT lasted a 'resonable time'

 

it should be repaired by the retailer FOC and your inspection fee refunded

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I heartily agree with the above comments.

 

I assume the warranty was for 12 months and it failed at 14 months. This is not acceptable for laptops.

 

No doubt the SELLER will try to get out of their responsibilities under SoGA but if you persist, you should get something. You won't get a full refund but if the laptop is unecomical to repair, you should get a partial refund as you have had 'enjoyment' of the product.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the manufacturer is perfectly within their rights to charge the full amount for the repair once it's outside the warranty period, but for the price I've paid and the fact it's failed just outside, plus the fact that the motherboard should last a lot longer that this and in my (and the repair company's) opinion is not 'fit for purpose'

 

:spy:

 

The manufacturer may charge to the extent that a buyer concedes that the goods conformed to contract when delivered.

 

If you fancy the chance to prove that there was something inherently wrong when the goods were delivered, this obliges the seller (not the manufacturer) to cover the cost of a repair, replacement or refund.

 

From there on it is a question of fact and the issue is the fault; the fitness for purpose when the goods were delivered is beside the point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are covered byh SOGA however thre is an EU directive whereby all electronic goods sold in the EU are covered for TWO years!

 

:!:

 

I have no idea of what that would be, apart from 1999/44/EC which applies to the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees in general, and is implemented by the Sale of Goods Act.

 

Part 5A, in particular, follows from Article 3 of the Directive whereby

 

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

which was not so much of an improvement to UK law, whereby the right to make a claim extends to six years.

 

Whether or not it is feasible to prove the claim is another matter. You would have to do that for yourself. The legislation does not provide a right, to appoint yourself as the judge and jury of your own cause. The way to make a claim is determined by national law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm acer? isnt the dc socket failed by any chance?

Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be, It seems like a power issue - the laptop switched itself off, then stayed on for a couple of minutes after reboot. Then failed again. From time to time it does light up briefly when you start it up, but goes off again before it has time to load up BIOS and stays dead for a day or so.

Why? is this a common problem with these?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the eu thing is in ADDITION to SOGA

soga is far far better.

 

you chase the retailer under soga.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome/

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the eu thing is in ADDITION to SOGA

soga is far far better.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome/

 

:roll:

 

No, "the EU thing" is not "in ADDITION to SOGA", in the present tense, because there is no part of "the EU thing" that is not implemented by the UK legislation. The UK legislation does not diverge from the EU thing and if it did, the UK legislation would be subject the authority of the European Court of Justice.

 

If you compare the wording with the "the EU thing", you will find that when the Sale of Goods Act was amended by The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002, to implement "the EU thing", the wording was cloned, for the most part, directly from "the EU thing".

Link to post
Share on other sites

dc socket would be it not always drecognising adaptor some thing i see alot

Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are covered byh SOGAlink18.gif however thre is an EU directive whereby all electronic goods sold in the EU are covered for TWO years! You are well within that time frame.

 

This is irrelevant for UK stuff. In the UK we get six years to pursue a claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...