Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Currys (cooker fault)


JGJ
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3732 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

Hello All,

I purchased a cooker some 4 yrs ago and it has developed a fault with the grille which has blown the elec breaker out and stopped working.

I have e-mailed them and phoned and received 2 e-mail messages from their know how team, both of which state:

 

1)You will NEED to provide us with an engineers report. Once we receive this report we will be able to establish where the fault lies.

 

2)In order to assist you, we will need an independent engineers report showing the fault and the cause.We require the report to be on headed paper and include the cost the engineers will charge to repair the unit. Once we receive this we will look at the cost to repair against the depreciated amount.

 

I made the claim to them using the SOGA 1979, which clearly states that in your claim you "MAY WISH" to obtain an Independent engrs report, whereas they are stating that "You" will "NEED" to obtain engrs report.

 

Surely they should be the ones providing the service engr to visit and report back at their expense and not for me to have to pay up front for an engineers report.

 

All info/advice will be gratefully received.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Soga also states it is down to you to prove an inherent fault and you can only do this with the help of a qualified engineer that field. You may be qualified yourself, hence the wording of the act and you may wish to prove it by providing your own report, if you are so qualified to do so. Most people require an official report to back up their claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

porkyp1g,

Thank you for your input.

 

I am not a qualified engr and the SOGA 1979 does not stipulate that I need/must obtain engrs report, it stipulates you may "wish" to.

 

The point I am trying to make, is that it should be up to Currys as the retailer, to provide at their expense the, in their opinion, a Qualified engrs report.

 

I am not in any financial position to pay for engrs reports when it is clearly CURRYS responsibility.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

I had similar with Argos. I paid for the report on the basis they reimbursed me for the cos in with the replacement item.

Iirc the report was about £50.

Without it you will get nowhere bud. After 6 months the onus is on you to prove the fault existed at point of sale/an inherent fault existed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

porkyp1g,

Thank you for your input

 

The grille has suddenly ceased to work and blew the breakers out, not the thing for a cooker to do,we are supposed to get some longevity out of an appliance and do not expect them to blow up after such a short time of normal use.That is why the SOGA extends to 6yrs.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I have to agree with the others. In the first 6 months of a sale, if anything goes wrong it is assumed that the fault was there from date of purchase and the seller has to prove it wasn't which is why they will generally repair with no quibbles. After 6 months it is down to the buyer to prove that the fault is a manufacturing one (I am not taking any warranty into account as that is in addition to your rights)

 

Currys are correct in asking for a report paid for by you however, if the issue is down to faulty manufacturing, you should get your money back from Currys.

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

silverfox1961

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

I understand the 6 months period however, what I do not understand is the pertinent point, that no one seems to think relevant, nor mentioned the fact that surely a cooker is manufactured to a general safe standard and not expected/prone to blow up after 4 years of light domestic use.

 

I recently had reason to deal with B&Q stores re a faulty wall hung electric fire, they at their expense, sent engrs on 2 occasions and 1 week later a manager who at their expense, brought a replacement fire and took the old faulty fire away for disposal. All this after 1 E-Mail to their customer services team claiming a repair/replacement using the SOGA 1979.

This was after a period of almost 4 years of using the fire.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on, it hasn't blown up has it? You got lucky with b and q as that isn't the norm. Most companies will require you to prove the fault backed up with a report. Just get the report done and if it's a manufacturing fault as you claim you will the money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is interesting JGJ, My cooker is also a Flavel and I can lite the grill and keep it lit only if i hold the knob in, the ignition switch has also gone in and that has already been replaced once before and yes my cooker is also 4 years old.

wonder if the Grill problem is a common failure. and yes i will be using SOGA to get it rectified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

letsgetitsorted,

 

The control knobs are of poor quality and mine have started to de-laminate the chrome/foil covering coming off and my grill control/knob is very loose.

I have found Curry's not the easiest company to deal with.

Will keep you in touch if any progress made and hopefully you will do the same.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi JGJ well today i finally managed to pay Currys a visit, the store response was, i needed to email their customer services which according to store will take around 7 -10 days to get a response from.

get an engineers report, i asked if this would be refunded the response was i dont know, i was also given the phone number for beko, who dont believe there is a known issue with the grill on these cookers.

 

email off to currys first then and shall see where that goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any engineer's report would need to identify the cause of the failure and not merely the extent of the failure. The longer after purchase that any failure takes place, the harder it will be demonstrate that it was present (albeit in a latent state) at the time of purchase.

 

The SOGA makes no reference as to how one proves or disproves non compliance with the Act - it is simply guidance given by the likes of the OFT to suggest that getting a report may help. If the cost of the report is disproportionate to the value of the goods then photos or bringing the item into court can assist the Judge in making a determination instead of incuring the cost of obtaining a report in that circumstance. Clearly a report would be appropriate in the instant case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello all,

 

Update, after 2 emails to, [email protected] ( AKA the KNOW HOW TEAM) and a Letterheaded elec engrs report stating that in their opinion that the cause was, the terminal to the grill had not been made up appropriately and had eventually failed causing the grille to fail and blow the breakers out.

 

They are not the quickest to respond, as you initially receive a comp generated reply from the Know How Team, tel no they gave me for contact (01142806407) then 4-5 days an actual email reply from the investigator and eventually a tel. call from a human being.

 

After a little haggling and their acceptance to pay for the report and a cash settlement, which will enable me to purchase a new electric cooker with oven and grill.or have my cooker repaired.

I am personally satisfied with this deal and I now await the arrival in my account of the settlement monies.

 

I hope that the info contained in these posts from all who have contributed, will help someone in the same predicament as I found myself.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool! Sometimes it pays to persevere. Well done for sticking to your guns

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

Hi JGJ can i ask how they settled yours, i have just been offered £100 off a new cooker purchase or if i get a price they will give me the repair value as long as it is not over £100.....i havent even needed to send in an engineers report.

 

cheers

Lets

can pm me if you would rather not say in the open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

letsgetitsorted,

 

Slightly different to your offer, full price of engrs report and enough to purchase another cooker or have the engrs repair it.

I am very happy with the offer and as I have said previously, they are not the easiest or the quickest to deal with.

Personally I would tell them to think again and ask for a higher evaluation and send in an engrs report as a back up, £100 seems a derisory offer unless your cooker is very close to the SOG limit to claim.

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...