Unrepairable TV on finance advice please

[Acerfan]

Hi,

Just found out my TV which I bought on finance is unrepairable. I paid £100 deposit & the rest is being paid on finance. It cost £820 originally (obviously paying more cos of finance), but have now been offered a replacement newer model which now retails at about £625.

 

Can anyone tell me:

• can I demand a TV that costs £820 as that's what I'm paying for?

• if I take the cheaper TV am i entitled to a refund of the difference?

• are there any implications with the finance company ie. do I have to take out a new loan agreement as the goods will not be the same?

• will the finance agreement cease automatically because I've had to return the goods?

• can I ask for a new agreement to be set up because the original goods were faulty & therefore get another 12 months interest free?

• will they run another credit check if I do have to set up a new agreement? as I'm not sure I'd be approved now

Thanks in advance for any hep anyone can give

 

Acerfan

[rosiecotton]

Before I can answer anything, how long have you had the TV?

[Acerfan]

Just over a year. However, I took it back to retailer within year's guarantee. They've had it over a month. Started repaying finance on 4/11.

[rosiecotton]

Ok,these are my thoughts and what I would advise.

 

can I demand a TV that costs £820 as that's what I'm paying for?

 

No, you are entitled to a like-for-like television, so one of the same spec. You can't have betterment - ie, you can't end up with a better television than the one you entered into a contract for. In addition, if the television is fairly old, there is even an argument that a brand new television of the same spec as a replacement is a good deal, as normally with older goods the law states that any wear and tear the customer has enjoyed has to be taken into account. So in this case, a brand new television of the same spec is actually more than reasonable, even if it's financially cheaper.

• if I take the cheaper TV am i entitled to a refund of the difference?

No, for the reasons stated above. You're not entitled to betterment or to get a television cheaper than you have contracted for.

• are there any implications with the finance company ie. do I have to take out a new loan agreement as the goods will not be the same?

No, the goods are replaced under the same contract so the finance will stand. The only addition will be that you have additional rights against the finance company under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act, but if the trader is sorting this out for you already there's probably no point going down that route just yet.

• will the finance agreement cease automatically because I've had to return the goods?

No, as you have simply had the goods replaced under the Sale of Goods Act and the contract still stands.

• can I ask for a new agreement to be set up because the original goods were faulty & therefore get another 12 months interest free?

No, your contract is not affected.

• will they run another credit check if I do have to set up a new agreement? as I'm not sure I'd be approved now

No, you won't have a new agreement.

 

 

Hope this helps.

[Acerfan]

Hi rosiecotton,

Thanks for clarifying that. Not quite the answer I was hoping for (don't worry, I'm not blaming you!! I appreciate your help) However, a friend of mine works in Hifi & TV sales & had a similar situation with a customer who demanded a replacement of same value as original. He agreed. I might try it. I know it seems a good deal cos the TV I've been offered is brand new but I can't find any reviews of the TV anywhere & Philips is selling them refurbished, which suggests to me it's not going to last.

[rosiecotton]

There's no harm in giving it a try!

 

I gave my answer as how the legal position stands, but there's absolutely nothing wrong in giving it a good go to see if you can get anything more

 

Good luck with it.

[Acerfan]

Hi,

Thanks again for your help. My theory is, irrespective of how I paid for the TV, as I effectively returned it to them before the expiry of the guarantee, I should be entitled to a full refund of what I paid for the TV as it is faulty. Therefore, I have £820 to spend on whatever TV I choose. Obviously, because it's tied up with the finance company, I have to spend it with that retailer. By this reasoning, I can demand a replacement of equal value to the original.

 

I'm definitely going to go in there & kick up a stink though. They've been useless at contacting me & wasted a month by giving me misleading information about who to contact about getting the TV repaired (didn't tell me just to bring it in & they'd send it off) & another month with it sitting at Philips not being repaired. They also mis-sold me PPI on the agreement which I've just managed to get refunded.

 

I'm sorry to rant, but I'm fed up with being taken advantage of & being taken for a ride.

[rosiecotton]

The trouble with that theory is that, in law, the Sale of Goods Act only offers a short period of time in which you can reject goods for a full refund. In cases such as this one, with TVs, that period of time is usually only a matter of weeks. After this, your remedies are - in the first instance - repair or replacement. If this fails, you are looking at rescission of the contract, which is basically a refund less an amount for any wear and tear you have had from the product. Therefore, if the product is still fairly new, you'd be entitled to nearly a full, if not full refund. However, after a year, you wouldn't be entitled to a full refund in law in all but the most exceptional circumstances.

 

Incidentally, warranties/guarantees are usually with the manufacturer and are given in addition to your rights under the Sale of Goods Act. These, however, are subject to any terms and conditions that the manufacturer wants to set down. Very few, if any, will allow for a full refund if the item becomes faulty after a year.

 

Your story about them messing you about sadly doesn't surprise me, that's a problem with a lot of retailers of this type and I do think work needs to be done on this - their staff just are not trained to understand what consumer rights are in a lot of cases.

 

Give it a shot anyway and let us know the response

[Acerfan]

Just been down there & picked out a £798 TV. However, the customer service guy 'didn't know how to put it through', so would have to wait for his manager to be in tomorrow. Now waiting for a phone call...

[rosiecotton]

Good result if that goes through

[Acerfan]

will let you know how it goes

[Rooster-UK]

Hi Acerfan.

 

The world is full of examples of equivalent value being cheaper than the originals.

 

The first mechanical video recorders cost hundreds of pounds. One in particular, the Ferguson Videostar 3V23 cost nearly £1000.

If you go into some of the bigger stores, today you can pick a better specification machine for £50, with the same guarantee.

 

Guarantee periods cannot be extended every time a piece of equipment is repaired.... if you start off with 12 months guarantee and it goes faulty 8 months later and is repaired you then have 4 months guarantee left.

 

Do you remember "TUF" shoes. They carried a 12 months guarantee. People who walk a lot of miles per day in their work, for example postmen, were buying the shoes for work. Because of the amount of walking they did, the shoes would wear out within the 12 months period. They would then take them back and get another pair under guarantee....... with a 12 month guarantee........

On that principle you would only buy one pair of shoes for the rest of your life. :D

[Acerfan]

Finally decided to ring manager after I didn't get my call as promised. He didn't know anything about it but looked around & found a garbled note from the guy I spoke to yesterday. He couldn't understand why he hadnt just put it through, said there was no problem (except he'd have to order one in) & that he'd refund the difference out of my deposit, back onto my card.

 

Just realised though that I get a discount at that store because of my work, so will go down there tomorrow & see if he'll refund the extra!!!

 

I know I'm cheeky, but I like to get the best deal I can:D

[JonCris]

Hi Acerfan.

 

The world is full of examples of equivalent value being cheaper than the originals.

 

The first mechanical video recorders cost hundreds of pounds. One in particular, the Ferguson Videostar 3V23 cost nearly £1000.

If you go into some of the bigger stores, today you can pick a better specification machine for £50, with the same guarantee.

 

Guarantee periods cannot be extended every time a piece of equipment is repaired.... if you start off with 12 months guarantee and it goes faulty 8 months later and is repaired you then have 4 months guarantee left.

 

Do you remember "TUF" shoes. They carried a 12 months guarantee. People who walk a lot of miles per day in their work, for example postmen, were buying the shoes for work. Because of the amount of walking they did, the shoes would wear out within the 12 months period. They would then take them back and get another pair under guarantee....... with a 12 month guarantee........

On that principle you would only buy one pair of shoes for the rest of your life. :D

 

 

Sorry Rooster your wrong & your example is not relevant in that the TUF Shoes where not defective & where "fit for purpose". They were not being replaced because they where faulty but merely as a sales promotion

 

On the otherhand if I have my cars faulty engine/geabox/clutch replaced by the dealer 1 day before the expiry of the original warranty the warranty is either extended or I would rely on the SOGA to provide me with the protection. You cannot provide goods or services without being subject to the act & for the dealer/manufacture to deny liabilty under warranty in such circumstances would I suggest be found to be unfair

 

The point being the warranty can be extended on replacement parts or equipment or the consumer relies on the Act for protection.

 

Also the original HP agreement must be cancelled or amended to include the change of goods otherwise the goods identified in it may no longer be relevant, different model/make/serial no. etc.

Also there has to be an adjustment in the price as you cannot be charged more for the goods than they are sold at Therefore if the replacement is cheaper then the agreement must be ammended to show that.

 

If the agreement is no longer a "true" reflection of the sale then it would become unenforcable

 

Otherwise dealer sells goods which turn out to be faulty. Consumer returns goods for replacement. Dealer has already received value payment from HP company then supplies a cheaper product whilst retaining his windfall Yeah right! The fact that the dealer was able to supply a simular product for less goes to your benefit not his or the HP company

[breadline]

You get a replacement unit or product your warrenty starts again, ive never had a product fixed under warrenty and recieved a new warrenty.

 

Or i may be tempted to bring on a breakage at about the 10 month stage:)

 

we would never need to by another product again.

 

just my 2penith:)

[JonCris]

Well I have because any part that is repaired or replaced must be of satisfactory quality & if THAT part fails again then you have another claim. It would be rediculous if on the last day of the warranty you could have a repair or replacement & one day after that repair or part could fail again & you could expect no redress.

[rosiecotton]

The warranty is a fixed time period from the time you enter into the contract and that won't change if you get a replacement item. However, the warranty provided will be in addition to your rights under the Sale of Goods Act, and these will still be in force. As JonCris says, you wouldn't expect to accept a replacement only for it to go wrong a short while later and the trader then says it's tough as the warranty has run out - you'd still be able to rely on the SOGA.

 

Also, if you get a like-for-like replacement under the same contract, your credit agreement will stand. Most electrical goods purchased will be under a standard credit agreement, not HP, and this won't be affected. The item itself is not one of the prescribed terms of the agreement.

[ukaviator]

Hi Acerfan

 

The Tv you have purchased should not fail in 1 year. With modern technology they should last many years. The Sale of Goods Act should cover you legally on this. Here is a snippet from the website. I will past a link below.

 

The Sale of Goods Act

 

The rights of customers: goods

 

If you sell your customer goods that don't conform to contract - that aren't as described, are unfit for their purpose or of unsatisfactory quality - you are legally obliged to resolve the problem if they seek redress.

The Sale of Goods Act states that if customers want to reject faulty goods, they have to do so within a "reasonable time". A legal definition of "reasonable" is not given though - it varies from case to case and could be just a few weeks from the date of purchase.

If a customer rejects faulty goods within this "reasonable" period, they're entitled to ask for their money back. All customers can claim compensation at any time if they choose. If you sell to consumers - not other traders - they can ask for a repair or a replacement immediately (instead of asking for a refund) at any time until six years after purchase.

If you're dealing with a consumer, any repair or replacement you arrange must not cause them too much inconvenience. You may have to pay for other costs such as transportation. However, if a replacement is impossible and the goods cannot be repaired economically, or vice versa, then you can offer a full or partial refund.

In law you have a responsibility to your customer for up to six years from the date of purchase (in Scotland, five years from discovery of the problem). During this period, you are legally obliged to deal with any claim of breach of contract.

 

The rights of customers: goods | Business Link

 

Hope this helps

 

Uk..

[JonCris]

If the goods are replaced by a new item then that replacement will also include a manufactures warranty of usually 1 year.

 

If the goods replaced are different in price they are NOT like for like.

 

Should the replacement goods be cheaper for whatever reason you would still be paying for the more expensive product which you no longer have making the existing agreement unenforcable. The agreement should be recalculated & the amount you pay will be after deduction of that already paid.

[rosiecotton]

But they would arguably be like-for-like if they are exactly the same spec and brand etc - if the price had gone down since bought, it still makes them identical goods. In law, a consumer cannot demand goods that are better than the ones they entered into a contract for, regardless of the price.

 

The agreement wouldn't be unenforceable at all - the faulty goods were simply replaced with identical goods under the same contract. You're not making a new contract.

 

If a trader does agree to replace with a higher spec item, then good on them - there should be more traders like that! They don't legally have to, though.

 

Incidentally, in this case the trader is being very reasonable indeed bearing in mind that the original poster had had 12 months use from the item as well and is actually going to end up with a better product than the one he originally bought, brand new. A good advert for a company going over and above the letter of the law.

[buzby]

The argument that the replacement item restarts the Warranty is false. Assuming a 1 Year warranty was provided at the point of sale, and the item failed at 11 months, the shopkeeper is entitled to replace the item, but the warranty would only be for 1 month.

 

Whilst this may seem unfair, and any reasonable person would argue that would mean the 2nd item was similarly flawed if it failed within 11 montrhs (but trhe warranty was now only 1 month), it's well-established that 'betterment' cannot take place. If a person purchases a produict with a 1 year warranty, but changes it for another because of a fault, the warranty stays at 12 months - why should they get a 2 year warranty for the same cost, when others do not? There may be other issues you can raise regarding being fit for purpoise, but the first warranty is transferred to the replacmeent product, it does not re-start.

[breadline]

For comet Within the first 28 days of purchase the warranty will start again and you will get a replacement product.

 

After this time it gets repaired or replaced and the warranty stays as it was.

 

Maybe differnet suppliers try different tricks maybe its better to get some info from some solid evidence as a lot of posts may be from members experiences and it limits us all by what we have been subject to in our purchases.

 

any one got any laws and links:)

[rosiecotton]

Manufacturer's warranties are subject to whatever terms they want to put in them, as they're in addition to your statutory rights and in fact manufacturers don't legally have to give a warranty at all.

 

Therefore, they're not going to go giving out extra warranties after you make a claim, in most cases, unless they're feeling very generous!

 

There aren't really any laws which dictate what manufacturers' warranties should include, as they're very much an addition to your legal rights. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002, which amended the Sale of Goods Act, made manufacturers' warranties legally binding once given, which before 31/3/02 was not the case (believe it or not) but that's about all statute-wise.

 

So I can't really link to any laws covering warranties, as there aren't any!

 

The Sale of Goods Act is a different matter altogether. Rights under this Act can last for up to six years, dependent on the item and the fault - it won't cover normal wear and tear. I think there are links to this Act in the stickies above (the netlawman site, I believe).

[JonCris]

In other words what is being suggested is if a new laptop is used to replace the faulty laptop (possibly from another manufacture) then the warranty which would be supplied with the new replacement laptop in the course of a normal sale is now invalidated or is only valid for the remainder of the faulty laptops warranty..I don't think so.

 

Also it is being suggested that just because you have bought on credit that if you are supplied with a cheaper replacement you will continue to pay the higher price you entered into originaly for the faulty model..again I don't think so.

 

If you had paid cash you would be refunded the difference

[breadline]

In other words what is being suggested is if a new laptop is used to replace the faulty laptop (possibly from another manufacture)

another supplier not sure why that would happen?