Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

Richer sounds faulty Tv ..resolved..


Redcar01
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2612 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

I bought a Sony tv kdl43w755c roughly 12 months ago and have had faults on it since i bought it.

 

I bought it for my son but as he works away sometimes we didn't realise it was faulty until after the time Richer Sounds would replace it.

 

Since then we have been in the hands of Sony, who unfortunately have been poor at resolving the issue and to be honest poor customer service as i had to get Richer sounds customer service team involved to get them out to repair it.

 

We have spent about 5 hours on the phone doing troubleshooting to look into the issue and eventually they had a repair engineer out to replace the main processor board but this has not resolved the issues we are having.

 

Once again Sony want to start the process again and to be honest i cannot go through this again.

 

I have spoken to Richer sounds customer service team and they also want us to do it again however i have been informed that under the CRA the repair agent has one attempt to repair the problem then if still faulty i can ask for a refund or replacement

 

I am a loyal customer and advocate of Richer Sounds and to be fair the customer service from your staff has all ways been very good.

 

I have seen the email address for John Clayton of Richer Sounds and sent him this email as well am i right in thinking we are

entitled a refund or credit note

 

hoping Richer sounds come through

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had troubles from day one then it should have gone to them 1st off as its a cra/soga issue not the retailers they are not under that scheme

 

Anyway RC and the rep here are very good and yes it should be a refund

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 information you have had about the Consumer Rights Act is right but actually, also wrong.

 

Within the first six months of a defect, you have to give the seller of the item an opportunity to repair it. If the repair fails or if the seller refuses to repair it you then have the right to reject the item for a replacement or a refund.

 

In your case, you have exceeded the six months from the date of the purchase of the item.

 

You now have to fall back on your ordinary contractual rights. This shouldn't cause a problem because those rights are very good.

 

You haven't told us what the faults are and how they are interfering with your use of the TV set. This is very important to know.

 

If the fault is serious so that you are effectively deprived of the use of the TV set then this is known as a breach of condition – or a fundamental breach of the contract. The fault effectively destroys the purpose of having entered into the contract for you. If this is the case then you are entitled to say that Richer Sounds have terminated the contract by the breach and you are accepting that. In that case, you were entitled to a refund or a replacement – at your option. Of course, if you wanted you could settle for repair but it is up to you.

 

If the defect with the TV simply amounts to an inconvenience – such as knobs falling off, or a wonky stand et cetera, then this would be known as a breach of warranty. This kind of breaches a breach which does not destroy the purpose of the contract. In this case you would be entitled only to insist on a repair – although if it could not be repaired then eventually you can claim some compensation.

 

If you can tell us more about the fault then we can give you better advice.

 

However, I'm assuming that there is something wrong with the TV which prevents you watching it. On the basis of what you have been doing so far – because you want to be is reasonable is possible – I would suggest that you write a letter to Richer Sounds, outline in a bullet-pointed form everything that has happened in a chronology.

 

Include the attempts you have made to have it repaired. Tell them that you now consider that you have taken all reasonable steps to remedy the problem and that you now consider that the fault is so serious that it has terminated the contract and that you now want a replacement or a refund. Tell them that you want to make arrangements to return the set to them.

 

The next bit is up to you. If you want this to go on and on and become protracted then you will simply are some for a response and asked them what they want to do. If you want to bring it to a rapid conclusion, then you will frame your letter in the form of a letter before action and explain to them that if you do not get your refund or replacement within 14 days that you will bring an action in the County Court.

 

On the basis of what you have told us here, I expect that your chance of success are better than 90%. However, you would have to be prepared to carry out your threat. It's not worth bluffing. Do bit of background reading here about County Court claims so that you can be certain that this is what you would want to do.

 

One thing you should be aware of is that because there will be assumptions made that you have had some use out of the TV, there could be a reduction in the amount of money refunded to you, or richer sounds could reasonably ask you to contribute to the price of a new set. If we assume that you have had 12 months use out of the set, then the reduction would be calculated on the expected life of the set, say, seven years minus one year so you could reasonably expect to claim 6/7 of the new price.

 

You may want to say that even during those 12 months you are unable to use a set, but I gather from what you have said that you didn't appreciate the faults and you didn't bring it to the attention of the sellers until after 12 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks for answering, because its my son who uses it we didnt realise it was faulty until about it was 2 months old , we went to Richer sounds and they said because was more than 30 days they wouldn't replace it, so we went to Sony who took 3 months of troubleshooting and messing me about before they had an engineer to look at it who then changed the main processor board but its still the same 2 months later, we have rang Sony again and they want to start going though the troubleshooting again.

the faults are

 

Netflix doesn't work

turns on by itself

Very slow - TV takes a long time to catch up with itself, if you are watching a program and want the tv guide, it takes ages to catch up and display it, then another 10/15 seconds until you can browse the TV guide.

- Turning the TV off - Every now and again (1 in 4 times probably) when you turn the TV off, the program and screen will turn off but the volume continues play in the background for 15 seconds or so.

- When you go to turn the TV off, sometimes it can take 20/30 seconds for it to do it (Not the remote batteries etc as i have checked)

- Channels - I have tested the ariel with another TV which when it scans it finds all the channels, on the Sony one it doesn't, it only shows around half. Have to re scan all the time.

- TV crashes and you have to turn on and off a lot.

- Often forgets the network connection and you have to re do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a Sony tv kdl43w755c roughly 12 months ago and have had faults on it since i bought it.

 

I bought it for my son but as he works away sometimes we didn't realise it was faulty until after the time Richer Sounds would replace it.

 

Since then we have been in the hands of Sony, who unfortunately have been poor at resolving the issue and to be honest poor customer service as i had to get Richer sounds customer service team involved to get them out to repair it.

 

We have spent about 5 hours on the phone doing troubleshooting to look into the issue and eventually they had a repair engineer out to replace the main processor board but this has not resolved the issues we are having.

 

Once again Sony want to start the process again and to be honest i cannot go through this again.

 

I have spoken to Richer sounds customer service team and they also want us to do it again however i have been informed that under the CRA the repair agent has one attempt to repair the problem then if still faulty i can ask for a refund or replacement

 

I am a loyal customer and advocate of Richer Sounds and to be fair the customer service from your staff has all ways been very good.

 

I have seen the email address for John Clayton of Richer Sounds and sent him this email as well am i right in thinking we are

entitled a refund or credit note

 

hoping Richer sounds come through

 

Dear Mr Taylor,

 

I was obviously most concerned to read of the problems you've been having with your TV and offer my sincere apologies.

 

Indeed, I have received your email and responded to it so that I may assist in resolving the matter.

 

Once again, I offer my apologies, I look forward to hearing back soon.

 

Many Thanks

 

John Clayton

Operations Director

Richer Sounds

Richer Sounds The UK's best value Hi-Fi, Home Cinema & TV Specialists!

Find your local branch | Mail Order: 0333 900 0093 | Customer Service Team: 0333 900 0094

Twitter: @RicherSounds | Facebook: facebook.com/richersounds

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks for answering, because its my son who uses it we didnt realise it was faulty until about it was 2 months old , we went to Richer sounds and they said because was more than 30 days they wouldn't replace it, so we went to Sony who took 3 months of troubleshooting and messing me about before they had an engineer to look at it who then changed the main processor board but its still the same 2 months later, we have rang Sony again and they want to start going though the troubleshooting again.

the faults are

 

Netflix doesn't work

turns on by itself

Very slow - TV takes a long time to catch up with itself, if you are watching a program and want the tv guide, it takes ages to catch up and display it, then another 10/15 seconds until you can browse the TV guide.

- Turning the TV off - Every now and again (1 in 4 times probably) when you turn the TV off, the program and screen will turn off but the volume continues play in the background for 15 seconds or so.

- When you go to turn the TV off, sometimes it can take 20/30 seconds for it to do it (Not the remote batteries etc as i have checked)

- Channels - I have tested the ariel with another TV which when it scans it finds all the channels, on the Sony one it doesn't, it only shows around half. Have to re scan all the time.

- TV crashes and you have to turn on and off a lot.

- Often forgets the network connection and you have to re do it.

 

Well I'm interested to see that Richer Sounds initial response to you showed an awareness of your statutory consumer rights. Let's hope that they don't suddenly become amnesiac about it now that you are raising the matter again.

 

In view of what you have said, it seems to me that as you have raise the matter within the six months and they have attempted to repair, you are now entitled to full back on the provision in the Consumer Rights Act which entitles you to insist on a replacement or refund – at your option. Given the fact that this occurred in the first six months, any reduction for use would be negligible.

 

I see that John Clayton, the Operations Director is reading this thread – so I hope that he takes note

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Richer Sounds, i was offered a replacement but as they dont sell the tv we had anymore we have swapped it for a better spec for £21 more from Richer Sounds. One happy customer

Thanks John and Tim at Richer Sounds

Link to post
Share on other sites

good result everyone...

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...