@curryspcworlduk Manufacturers fault not Currys problem.

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

The Asus tablet we bought just over 12 mths ago for £250 stopped working because of what store staff identified as a manufacturers fault (the screen froze). We were offered £150 which was refused. Surely if it is a manufacturers fault a full refund. repair or replacement should be offered under the 2yr EU directive. Please advise

[rebel11]

Hi Paul

 

Welcome to CAG

 

How did you pay for it?

[dx100uk]

forget eu

 

under soga the retailer is obliged to replace it or give a full refund

if the manu has ack'd its a known fault.

 

no exceptions.

 

dx

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

Hi Paul

 

Welcome to CAG

 

How did you pay for it?

Paid for by debit card.

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

forget eu

 

under soga the retailer is obliged to replace it or give a full refund

if the manu has ack'd its a known fault.

 

no exceptions.

 

dx

Thanks d.

I don't know if the manufacturer has acknowledged it's a known fault. It was the store that said it was a manuafacturers fault and logged as such on Currys 'Knowhow' system.

[caro]

Your contract was with currys. The manufacturers issue is their problem.

[BazzaS]

Thanks d.

I don't know if the manufacturer has acknowledged it's a known fault. It was the store that said it was a manuafacturers fault and logged as such on Currys 'Knowhow' system.

 

Again, irrelevant if it is a "manufacturers fault", the retailer is liable.

 

So much the better if you can get it in writing that they are saying it is a manufacturer's fault, though : since that means it was present at time of manufacture and you don't

a) have to accept a repair

b) have to prove it was an inherent fault at time of manufacture

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

Thanks BazzaS.

I accidentally picked up a copy of a print of the store's log when I left. The first entry on the 'complaints log' off their Myriad computer system reads, "gary emailed Daniel Eggleton. tablet is in store and does have a manufactures fault".

Would that suffice?

[BazzaS]

Thanks BazzaS.

I accidentally picked up a copy of a print of the store's log when I left. The first entry on the 'complaints log' off their Myriad computer system reads, "gary emailed Daniel Eggleton. tablet is in store and does have a manufactures fault".

Would that suffice?

 

It convinces me!

It may well convince the company, when you finally get through to someone who appreciates that they (as the retailer) are liable under SOGA even if it is a manufacturer's fault.

 

However, I suspect the question might become would it convince a court .... Which would then come down to if it was admissible in evidence (based on it being a store print out you accidentally picked up).

You could, of course, serve them with an SAR and see if they disclose it.......

[BankFodder]

Thanks BazzaS.

I accidentally picked up a copy of a print of the store's log when I left. The first entry on the 'complaints log' off their Myriad computer system reads, "gary emailed Daniel Eggleton. tablet is in store and does have a manufactures fault".

Would that suffice?

 

Well done on getting hold of that. Would it be possible to scan it and post it on the forum please. It would be very interesting to see this kind of documentation.

 

In so far as the EU directive goes, it would be very interesting to see it enforced and I have seen at least a couple of cases reported on this forum over the years where the County Court judge would not accept it. I'm sure that this would be an incorrect decision of a County Court judge – but the people involved didn't want to go any further.

 

In fact I have never seen the EU directive implemented by any British court – at least not in so far as the two-year replacement guarantee goes

 

I have to take issue very slightly with what DX has said. I'm afraid that even with a manufacturers fault, a court would always take into account the amount of use that you have had from the item before considering an award. If you have had 12 months full use of the item – then this would be taken into account when calculating a reduced compensation.

 

It seems to me that offering you £150 against a new price of £250 after only one year's use, is not adequate at all. I think that you probably need to calculate a compensation value based on an expected life of about five years. That seems reasonable to me. That means that you would expect a 20% deduction from the price of a new replacement.

 

I think having obtained their documentation showing that there is a manufacturers fault is extremely useful and can be used to embarrass them and impress them even to giving you a full replacement price.

 

If you post the repair log up on this forum so that it is clear that everyone to see. This will create some pressure on them to deal with it properly.

 

If it remains a private matter simply between you and Curry's then there will be considerably less pressure and they will be much more likely to argue the toss.

 

However, if push comes to shove then it would probably be reasonable for you to accept £250 less 20%. However, stick your heels in, threaten a legal action, tell them that you will produce the log in court and that you will make sure that the press knows about it and tell them that it is already public information on this forum

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]52515[/ATTACH]

 

I've read that the SOGA provides cover for goods bought for up to six years in England and Wales. After 6 months you have to prove the that the item has failed through no fault of your own. As Currys has said it is a manufacturing fault and I didn't manufacture it perhaps I might have a chance.

[dx100uk]

pers i'd be I the shop tomorrow

with that bit of paper - manager please

 

you sayhere its a manu fault.

 

now i'd like to use my product this afternoon.

 

could you either give my refund

or

a new working one please.

 

thank you.

[BazzaS]

Well done on getting hold of that. Would it be possible to scan it and post it on the forum please. It would be very interesting to see this kind of documentation.

 

In so far as the EU directive goes, it would be very interesting to see it enforced and I have seen at least a couple of cases reported on this forum over the years where the County Court judge would not accept it. I'm sure that this would be an incorrect decision of a County Court judge – but the people involved didn't want to go any further.

 

In fact I have never seen the EU directive implemented by any British court – at least not in so far as the two-year replacement guarantee goes

 

I have to take issue very slightly with what DX has said. I'm afraid that even with a manufacturers fault, a court would always take into account the amount of use that you have had from the item before considering an award. If you have had 12 months full use of the item – then this would be taken into account when calculating a reduced compensation.

 

It seems to me that offering you £150 against a new price of £250 after only one year's use, is not adequate at all. I think that you probably need to calculate a compensation value based on an expected life of about five years. That seems reasonable to me. That means that you would expect a 20% deduction from the price of a new replacement.

 

I think having obtained their documentation showing that there is a manufacturers fault is extremely useful and can be used to embarrass them and impress them even to giving you a full replacement price.

 

If you post the repair log up on this forum so that it is clear that everyone to see. This will create some pressure on them to deal with it properly.

 

If it remains a private matter simply between you and Curry's then there will be considerably less pressure and they will be much more likely to argue the toss.

 

However, if push comes to shove then it would probably be reasonable for you to accept £250 less 20%. However, stick your heels in, threaten a legal action, tell them that you will produce the log in court and that you will make sure that the press knows about it and tell them that it is already public information on this forum

 

It would be worth checking if the time limit by which member States have to implement the Directive has passed by ....

 

If it is an EU Directive it has only "vertical" "direct effect".

Direct effect is where an individual can rely on a right or obligation from EU legislation and enforce it in a national (such as UK) court.

 

Treaty Articles (the TEU and TFEU) articles and EU Regulations are directly effective both vertically and horizontally.

Vertically is "state to individual", while horizontally is "individual to individual".

 

Since it is a directive there is no horizontal direct effect : you can't say to a court "you must follow the EU directive" as you could if it were

a) individual suing the state, or "emanation of the state" using a Directive, or an

b) individual suing a firm, using a Regulation or Treaty Article (rather than a Directive)

 

Is it then possible for "indirect effect" to apply? (With a Directive ) : this is where national (UK) law had to be read (if possible) with the EU law "in mind"

So, if SOGA says "reasonable time " and the Directive says "2 years"...... 2 years it is.

 

However, if there is a "clear conflict" (EU : 2 years, but The Flange and Bucket Act 2015 says "6 months"), the EU law can't be used in a national court by indirect effect.

 

I wonder if the "SOGA: 6 months" is a duration from statute, or derived from case law, and if the Directive applies there at all (since it is often noted that SOGA is separate from an warranty!)

 

If both direct and indirect effect fail, there is a theoretical 3rd option ("State liability"), but for this situation it might be a long shot : suing the State for their failure to implement the Directive, causing you loss. That would be worthy of a thread of its own

 

So, what to do in practice?

 

Proceed with SOGA with the retailer : they may well back down.

Would you consider approaching the manufacturer if it was " less hassle" in the long run : have they accepted it is a manufacturing fault?

(it seems a shame to let the retailer off the hook, but in the end it will be about getting what you want, or the closest to it, for least hassle!)

[BankFodder]

I think that directives have a direct effect even if they are not formally adopted and implemented

[BankFodder]

pers i'd be I the shop tomorrow

with that bit of paper - manager please

 

you sayhere its a manu fault.

 

now i'd like to use my product this afternoon.

 

could you either give my refund

or

a new working one please.

 

thank you.

I agree. I would also take the recorder with me and make sure that I got everything down.

 

I wouldn't take the original of this document – just a copy so that you can leave it with them as well.

[BazzaS]

I think that directives have a direct effect even if they are not formally adopted and implemented

 

Not so:

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_effect correctly cites Ratti in the text and at footnote 8, where direct effect can't occur until the date for implementation has passed.

 

Once implementation date has passed the directive has vertical direct effect.

It will never have horizontal direct effect. The UK may implement it in UK law : but that isn't direct effect.

Horizontal direct effect is an individual suing an individual and saying to the court "you must make your decision based on the Regulation / Treaty article", but ( individual to individual) you can't say "the Directive binds the court" - the Directive directs the UK government to implement it in UK law : perhaps semantics, but semantics that stop it having horizontal direct effect in a national court.

[rebel11]

Hi Paul

 

Contact your Card Provider, ask to do a Chargeback, amend the template (scroll down), send the report you've managed to obtain (photocopy it first), send it Recorded Delivery.

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/how-do-i-use-chargeback

 

 

 

 

Paid for by debit card.

[MaxxPower]

I think the people saying "Demand a full refund" are being a bit premature here. Under the SOGA, aren't the retailer entitled to offer a partial refund based on age/use vs expected lifespan? They aren't required to give a full refund if a product fails 12, 24, 36, etc months later even if it's covered under the SOGA.

 

£150 seems too low however. A tablet can reasonably be expected to last at least 5 years, so a partial refund should be no less than £200.

 

So essentially they should be offering either a repair, replacement or minimum refund of £200, though which they offer is up to them sadly, not you.

[rebel11]

Nobody's said 'demand a full refund', the debit card company will no doubt reduce the refund figure because the OP has had some usage from the product, but £150 is laughable, I'd be seeking at least £215.

 

I think the people saying "Demand a full refund" are being a bit premature here. Under the SOGA, aren't the retailer entitled to offer a partial refund based on age/use vs expected lifespan? They aren't required to give a full refund if a product fails 12, 24, 36, etc months later even if it's covered under the SOGA.

 

£150 seems too low however. A tablet can reasonably be expected to last at least 5 years, so a partial refund should be no less than £200.

 

So essentially they should be offering either a repair, replacement or minimum refund of £200, though which they offer is up to them sadly, not you.

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

Currys 'escalated complaints' chap has just called. He told me that as the tablet is out of warrenty I will have to get an engineers report confirming that the manufacturers fault was present when we bought it. Here we go

[ashmk]

Currys have always been sneaky, using every stall or trick in the book to get out of refunding. That's why I, and many others never buy from there.

 

Tell your friends not to shop there. One day they will run out of people.

[Deadyankee]

Which shop do you use then who don't question anything returned to ensure what the cause of the fault is? I've not come across many that don't insist on reports, or the chance to inspect the good before deciding on what to do. But if there are some out there that don't do these checks, please pray tell...

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

Which shop do you use then who don't question anything returned to ensure what the cause of the fault is? I've not come across many that don't insist on reports, or the chance to inspect the good before deciding on what to do. But if there are some out there that don't do these checks, please pray tell...

The tablet was returned to Currys. They had it a month and decided it was a manufacturers fault and they could not repair it.

[rebel11]

Read the whole thread. It's already been established that there's an inherent fault, Paul has evidence kindly provided by Currys. Paul you should actually send that in as the requested report.

 

Which shop do you use then who don't question anything returned to ensure what the cause of the fault is? I've not come across many that don't insist on reports, or the chance to inspect the good before deciding on what to do. But if there are some out there that don't do these checks, please pray tell...

[Mr Paul Heathcote]

Another chap from Currys has just been on the phone to me. He admitted that they had examined my tablet, identified a manufacturers fault, decided that it couldn't be repaired economically and again offered me £150.00. I declined their offer and asked that he confirmed what he had told me in an email. He said he would.