TV from Tesco not working

Coillte_Bhoy

Bought a TV in tesco just under 2 years ago. It has suddenly stopped working, its finished according to TV repairman, what are my rights? I presume Tesco have to replace it even though im sure they will try and fob me off. Any advice much appreciated.

Denny_Crane

It's very simple. Pop it back to Tesco, they will take it and may need it for a while to get it repaired. Your consumer rights state that you should not be put to inconvenience during the process of rectifying the fault. I would suggest around 7 working days this time of year seems reasonable.

If they're unwilling to help at all you may need to get in contact with their head office. Failing everything there is the small claims procedure, however lets not jump the gun.

When dealing with the store remain firm but polite. Start dealing with whomever on customer services, but if you're not getting satisfaction ask to speak to a manager.

Sleeper12

Coillte_Bhoy wrote:

Bought a TV in tesco just under 2 years ago. It has suddenly stopped working, its finished according to TV repairman, what are my rights? I presume Tesco have to replace it even though im sure they will try and fob me off. Any advice much appreciated.

I'm sure Tesco will look after you so long as you have the proof of purchase.
For future reference getting a regular repairman voids most warranty so I wouldn't mention it to Tesco when returning it

Coillte_Bhoy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm sure Tesco will look after you so long as you have the proof of purchase.
For future reference getting a regular repairman voids most warranty so I wouldn't mention it to Tesco when returning it

Ya, i have the receipt

njs030

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Ya, i have the receipt

Who looked at it?
They will have to send it off to the manufacturer to see what caused the fault. It will take a bit of time especially at this time of year.
If it's been opened by someone other than an approved repairman they will know and your warranty will be invalid.

Denny_Crane

notjustsweet wrote: »

Who looked at it?
They will have to send it off to the manufacturer to see what caused the fault. It will take a bit of time especially at this time of year.
If it's been opened by someone other than an approved repairman they will know and your warranty will be invalid.

I respectfully disagree here.

While I agree the OP should not have had it looked at - there was no need - he was obviously unaware of that. While the manufacturer can make their warranty (more properly termed a guarantee) contingent on stickers not being broken the retailer can not avoid their obligations in relation to a faulty product which exist for a number of years after the sale of the product, open or not. Of course, if the retailer can show damage caused by an unauthorised repair that's different.

The consumer is under no obligation to wait for the retailer send it anywhere. Whilst the retailer has a reasonable time to inspect the goods, once that has happened a solution must be forthcoming. The time of year does play a part, of course, but the OP should expect to know what is happening with a minimum of delay and fuss.

Frankly a direct swap in the store for a similar model would be ideal, but we'll have to wait and see what push back, if any, the OP gets.

njs030

Denny_Crane wrote: »

I respectfully disagree here.

While I agree the OP should not have had it looked at - there was no need - he was obviously unaware of that. While the manufacturer can make their warranty (more properly termed a guarantee) contingent on stickers not being broken the retailer can not avoid their obligations in relation to a faulty product which exist for a number of years after the sale of the product, open or not. Of course, if the retailer can show damage caused by an unauthorised repair that's different.

The consumer is under no obligation to wait for the retailer send it anywhere. Whilst the retailer has a reasonable time to inspect the goods, once that has happened a solution must be forthcoming. The time of year does play a part, of course, but the OP should expect to know what is happening with a minimum of delay and fuss.

Frankly a direct swap in the store for a similar model would be ideal, but we'll have to wait and see what push back, if any, the OP gets.

You can disagree to your heart's content but the retailer had every right to send it off and find out what happened. They aren't going to replace it if it's been damaged through misuse and the only way to find that out is by inspection.

Sleeper12

Denny_Crane wrote: »

I respectfully disagree here.

While I agree the OP should not have had it looked at - there was no need - he was obviously unaware of that. While the manufacturer can make their warranty (more properly termed a guarantee) contingent on stickers not being broken the retailer can not avoid their obligations in relation to a faulty product which exist for a number of years after the sale of the product, open or not. Of course, if the retailer can show damage caused by an unauthorised repair that's different.

The consumer is under no obligation to wait for the retailer send it anywhere. Whilst the retailer has a reasonable time to inspect the goods, once that has happened a solution must be forthcoming. The time of year does play a part, of course, but the OP should expect to know what is happening with a minimum of delay and fuss.


Frankly a direct swap in the store for a similar model would be ideal, but we'll have to wait and see what push back, if any, the OP gets.

I thought the manufacturer would have a right to test the product. Lets say someone poured water in the vents. I assumed this to be the case. Am I wrong on this?

Does the TV have a 2 year warranty?

The warranty is a great thing IMO but even after the 2 years OP has the sale of goods act

Ya, i have the receipt

Excellent news! It's tough using sale of goods act or warranty without receipt
I'm not a Tescos shopper myself but I'm told they have a good after sales service. I don't think you will have a problem with them

Coillte_Bhoy

Wasn't opened, he checked that there was power coming through thats all. there was no issue with power supply

Coillte_Bhoy

jacksie66 wrote: »

Does the TV have a 2 year warranty?

What does that matter? Anyway surely covered under EU 3 year warranty?

Sleeper12

Coillte_Bhoy wrote:

What does that matter? Anyway surely covered under EU 3 year warranty?

Sales of goods act gives you up to 6 years for for faulty parts. I'd imagine it would be hard to get results after 4 years myself. If someone were to leave a T.V. on 24/7 it might be the equivalent of 10 or 12 years of regular use

njs030

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I thought the manufacturer would have a right to test the product. Lets say someone poured water in the vents. I assumed this to be the case. Am I wrong on this?

No you're not wrong. They have a right to check if it's a fault or physical damage.

The customer should have his problem sorted out in a reasonable time frame, that could be 2 weeks or more depending on if they decide to repair, replace or refund. It's likely to be one of the first two after 2 years though.

runawaybishop

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

What does that matter? Anyway surely covered under EU 3 year warranty?

What 3 year eu warranty?

Kristopherus

runawaybishop wrote: »

What 3 year eu warranty?

I thought it was actually 6 yrs, and that our own legislation was introduced to enact the E.U. legislation.

Sleeper12

Kristopherus wrote:

I thought it was actually 6 yrs, and that our own legislation was introduced to enact the E.U. legislation.

No. Our sale of goods act is possibly the best consumer protection in Europe. EU law gives you 12 months on a mobile phone. Our law gives up to 6 years. Its one of the few cases where Irish law is better than EU afaik

Esse85

How long is too long before the customer can expect some form of compensation for being without their tv provided its proved that the fault was not caused by the customer?

Nonoperational

Esse85 wrote: »

How long is too long before the customer can expect some form of compensation for being without their tv provided its proved that the fault was not caused by the customer?

There is no hard and fast rule. If it's a €100 TV used daily for 3 years then thats probably it. If it's a €1000 tv then I think up to 6 years is possible.

Denny_Crane

notjustsweet wrote: »

You can disagree to your heart's content but the retailer had every right to send it off and find out what happened. They aren't going to replace it if it's been damaged through misuse and the only way to find that out is by inspection.

They have every right to do that within the legislation which comes from the European Directive(s) on the matter. One can disagree as to the length of time that entails but not on the wording of the enacting SI.

The limitation of claims in Ireland is six years. This is NOT the same as a six year guarantee but is significantly longer than any guarantee offered by a manufacturer (generally).

Denny_Crane

Nonoperational wrote: »

There is no hard and fast rule. If it's a €100 TV used daily for 3 years then thats probably it. If it's a €1000 tv then I think up to 6 years is possible.

From my, fairly limited experience, of this a sliding scale is applied. A €1000 item going wrong after 5 years should yield around €200 in damages. Every situation is different.

Interestingly (or not) a company can contract out of the limitation by, say, providing a 10 year guarantee. This is the concept of a shield not a sword but I'm digressing, and my understanding is digression may be punished :pac:

theteal

All this talk of warranty is pointless, means next to nothing in Ireland as the Sale of Goods Act is what stipulates your consumer rights.

Back to the retailer with you OP. They may just repair it for you or they may start talking gibberish about warranty.

If the latter you may have to go to the SCC to take them to task. Will it be worth it for this particular telly? Amount of use of the item will be factored into an potential SCC award.

njs030

Denny_Crane wrote: »

They have every right to do that within the legislation which comes from the European Directive(s) on the matter. One can disagree as to the length of time that entails but not on the wording of the enacting SI.

The limitation of claims in Ireland is six years. This is NOT the same as a six year guarantee but is significantly longer than any guarantee offered by a manufacturer (generally).

If you could find a post by me within this thread where I say different I'd love to see that please.
You're the person claiming he shouldn't have to wait for it to be sent off remember... The supplier have a right to check the damage and decide on a course of action.

Denny_Crane

notjustsweet wrote: »

If you could find a post by me within this thread where I say different I'd love to see that please.
You're the person claiming he shouldn't have to wait for it to be sent off remember... The supplier have a right to check the damage and decide on a course of action.

Within a reasonable amount of time - which in my opinion is shorter than what you intimated in post #6. Granted you did not stipulate a time frame as I did. Would you care to do that now for the sake of argument and I'll state my position on whether I think that's reasonable or not? Or not - either way I believe the OP is now on the right track.

Denny_Crane

theteal wrote: »

All this talk of warranty is pointless, means next to nothing in Ireland as the Sale of Goods Act is what stipulates your consumer rights.

Back to the retailer with you OP. They may just repair it for you or they may start talking gibberish about warranty.

If the latter you may have to go to the SCC to take them to task. Will it be worth it for this particular telly? Amount of use of the item will be factored into an potential SCC award.

There is a mechanism where by the retailer can defer their obligations under warranty to the manufacturer's guarantee as long as that guarantee does not impinge on the consumer's rights, so don't be too gung ho on not dealing with the manufacturer.

njs030

Denny_Crane wrote: »

Within a reasonable amount of time - which in my opinion is shorter than what you intimated in post #6. Granted you did not stipulate a time frame as I did. Would you care to do that now for the sake of argument and I'll state my position on whether I think that's reasonable or not? Or not - either way I believe the OP is now on the right track.

There's no possible way of saying x amount of time is reasonable. It's written that way for the exact reason that there is no time scale deemed perfect and each case should be decided on its own merits.
Without knowing exactly what the problem is how on earth can you, me or anyone else dictate how long is reasonable to fix it. Be realistic for god's sake

theteal

Denny_Crane wrote: »

There is a mechanism where by the retailer can defer their obligations under warranty to the manufacturer's guarantee as long as that guarantee does not impinge on the consumer's rights, so don't be too gung ho on not dealing with the manufacturer.

True, sometimes it may be quicker when still in this warranty period. Technically it should be the retailer who deals with the manufacturer and not give the consumer extra work to do. In this case though I suspect this warranty period may be expired.

GarIT

Denny_Crane wrote: »

While the manufacturer can make their warranty (more properly termed a guarantee) contingent on stickers not being broken the retailer can not avoid their obligations in relation to a faulty product which exist for a number of years after the sale of the product, open or not. Of course, if the retailer can show damage caused by an unauthorised repair that's different.

I've been through the system before. The retailer or somebody authorised by the retailer are the only people that can open a device without giving the retailer a strong case against repairing, replacing, or refunding the device. There are no laws listing what can and can't be done that is up to a judge on a case by case basis, often they will side with the retailer if the device has been opened.

E.g. If you have the screen replaced on a phone by someone other than the retailer or manufacturer you would nearly never win a case when something else goes wrong with it.

In this case it doesn't affect the OP but you are wrong on that point.

joeysoap

Afaik I year warranty in Ireland ,(shop is responsible) But there is an EU 2 year warranty from manufacturer. The 6 year thingy is that the product should have a life of at least 6 years during which it must be repairable (at owners cost, but there is no way anyone should be told in less than 2 years that's it's kaput. Daughter had much a similar problem with a fridge freezer a few years ago (Currys) retailer said they didn't repair after 3 years and she would have to buy a new one, I advised her to say she contacted the consumer association and they said it must be repairable for up to 6 years. Currys changed attitude immediately, got repaired by reputable company (who don't do nixes) at very reasonable cost. Working fine since - about 4 years.

GarIT

joeysoap wrote: »

Afaik I year warranty in Ireland ,(shop is responsible) But there is an EU 2 year warranty from manufacturer. The 6 year thingy is that the product should have a life of at least 6 years during which it must be repairable (at owners cost, but there is no way anyone should be told in less than 2 years that's it's kaput.

The warranty can be of any length or there may not be a warranty at all, that is up to the manufacturer/retailer. There is no EU warranty, I will explain what there is from the EU later.

Under Irish law you are allowed take a case against a retailer for up to 6 years after the device is purchased. That does not in any way state or suggest that a device should last 6 years. The only reference to how long a device should last in Irish law is that a device must last "A reasonable period of time" to be decided by a judge on a case by case basis.

Ireland allows you to take a case against a retailer for up to 6 years. Other countries in Europe previously only allowed the consumer to sue for the first year, or first 18 months etc. The EU law you are referring to states that the consumer must be able to sue for the first two years, not that the device must last two years, as we have always allowed the consumer to sue for 6 years the EU law is irrelevant to us.

Denny_Crane

notjustsweet wrote: »

There's no possible way of saying x amount of time is reasonable. It's written that way for the exact reason that there is no time scale deemed perfect and each case should be decided on its own merits.
Without knowing exactly what the problem is how on earth can you, me or anyone else dictate how long is reasonable to fix it. Be realistic for god's sake

It's much simpler than you're making out. Weeks without a TV makes the standard of significant inconvenience. It's a matter of working days not weeks. It's entirely realistic to expect a retailer to do a swap there and then for a product that has developed a fault under two years from purchase.

GarIT wrote: »

I've been through the system before. The retailer or somebody authorised by the retailer are the only people that can open a device without giving the retailer a strong case against repairing, replacing, or refunding the device. There are no laws listing what can and can't be done that is up to a judge on a case by case basis, often they will side with the retailer if the device has been opened.

E.g. If you have the screen replaced on a phone by someone other than the retailer or manufacturer you would nearly never win a case when something else goes wrong with it.

In this case it doesn't affect the OP but you are wrong on that point.

While it's not my intention to turn this into a peeing contest, having been through the system more than most on behalf of people I completely disagree that it gives the seller any right to reject a resolution for the customer. The retailer would have to raise the issue of damage having been caused, not simply that a sticker is broken. This can either be extremely easily done - photo of the damage - or is so difficult to prove that it becomes uneconomical to do so - static discharge damage for example.

The vast majority of these 'cases' are not contested. The vast majority that are are sorted out informally by the registrar. I doubt either of us have statistically significant sample sizes and I concede it will vary from case to case but there is absolutely no reason legally and almost no reason practically for an open device to be rejected on that basis alone, especially when no work has been done to the device.

Denny_Crane

GarIT wrote: »

The warranty can be of any length or there may not be a warranty at all, that is up to the manufacturer/retailer. There is no EU warranty, I will explain what there is from the EU later.

Under Irish law you are allowed take a case against a retailer for up to 6 years after the device is purchased. That does not in any way state or suggest that a device should last 6 years. The only reference to how long a device should last in Irish law is that a device must last "A reasonable period of time" to be decided by a judge on a case by case basis.

Ireland allows you to take a case against a retailer for up to 6 years. Other countries in Europe previously only allowed the consumer to sue for the first year, or first 18 months etc. The EU law you are referring to states that the consumer must be able to sue for the first two years, not that the device must last two years, as we have always allowed the consumer to sue for 6 years the EU law is irrelevant to us.

While there is no 2 year EU warranty per se, there is essentially a de facto one on many goods. The directive (and enacting legislation) was mistakenly interpreted by so many that many manufacturers simply started giving two year guarantees. I'd submit that given at least (for the sake of argument) 8/10 TV manufacturers give a two year guarantee it would be extremely difficult for the remaining 2/10 to successfully forward the argument that their product was so shoddy that it can't make the standard of the other 8/10.

You're absolutely correct that it doesn't stop at 2 years in Ireland, but within two I'd suggest it's pretty cut and dried these days.

I'm completely OT now so I'll not post again - if anyone wants to continue the discussion of the legalities in the abstract there is a legal discussions forum. OP as I'm unsubbing the thread I'd be delighted to hear how it went by PM. There are some very helpful people here, even the ones who are in my view a mistaken - of course you'll find many retailers similarly mistaken! If you need help with the small claims procedure contact FLAC (FLAC.ie). It's very simple to do, just make sure to get the correct party, but I believe giving you advice on that here is both premature and probably contravenes the rules against legal advice.

joeysoap

My last word on this, the Samsung Tv I bought in Ireland had a one year warranty, the same TV in Spain and Portugal has a 2 year warranty. I suspect Ireland is at at the lower range of warranties, but I would argue the EU 2 year rule if necessary. Obviously I didn't (don't ) understand it but obviously neither does 80% of manufacturers.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

joeysoap wrote: »

My last word on this, the Samsung Tv I bought in Ireland had a one year warranty, the same TV in Spain and Portugal has a 2 year warranty. I suspect Ireland is at at the lower range of warranties, but I would argue the EU 2 year rule if necessary. Obviously I didn't (don't ) understand it but obviously neither does 80% of manufacturers.

You don't understand it. Warranty is superseded by consumer law. We have stronger protection than the EU law. Why quote a weaker law?

theteal

joeysoap wrote: »

My last word on this, the Samsung Tv I bought in Ireland had a one year warranty, the same TV in Spain and Portugal has a 2 year warranty. I suspect Ireland is at at the lower range of warranties, but I would argue the EU 2 year rule if necessary. Obviously I didn't (don't ) understand it but obviously neither does 80% of manufacturers.

A warranty is a sales tool. It can be useful for resolving issues on relatively new items but it means nothing as far as your consumer rights are concerned. Manufacturers can can put an hour/week/Sundays only warranty on an item, it makes absolutely no difference in Ireland.

The 2 year EU directive was never adopted in Ireland as our own Sale of Goods Act offers much more consumer protection. The act purposely does not have stated time limits as all products are not of the same quality but instead ensures that any undamaged item should last a "reasonable" amount of time.

I would argue the <2 years is not reasonable for the life of a telly - it just sits in the corner of a room and gets switched on for a couple of hours a day. Now were the telly a €200 own brand Tesco model, I'd be annoyed but not sure if I'd pursue it as a SCC judge will factor in the ~2 years of use, put a figure on that time e.g. €80 per year, add the cost of the SCC (€25 iirc) which leaves me with the value of a bag of chips.

Were it a branded expensive telly, then we get to have some fun!

Anyway, as the OP has yet to even go back to the retailer I may be getting way ahead of myself and typed all of that for nothing

stimpson

joeysoap wrote: »

My last word on this, the Samsung Tv I bought in Ireland had a one year warranty, the same TV in Spain and Portugal has a 2 year warranty. I suspect Ireland is at at the lower range of warranties, but I would argue the EU 2 year rule if necessary. Obviously I didn't (don't ) understand it but obviously neither does 80% of manufacturers.

I've had 2 faulty Samsung TVs. One was 5 years old. I got a depreciated refund as they couldn't repair it (~€250 for a TV that cost a grand). The second was just over the 1 year warranty. I was offered a choice of 2 higher spec TVs or a depreciated refund which I took (€850 for a TV that cost €1200).

The Warranty is in addition to your rights under the sale of goods act. I suspect Samsung offer a one year warranty here as most people won't pursue it after the warranty is up. In the rest of the EU they offer 2 years because everyone else does due to the 2 year rule.

njs030

Denny_Crane wrote: »

It's much simpler than you're making out. Weeks without a TV makes the standard of significant inconvenience. It's a matter of working days not weeks. It's entirely realistic to expect a retailer to do a swap there and then for a product that has developed a fault under two years from purchase..

Again. The retailer has to ascertain that there is a fault and there hasnt been any damage caused. The only way of doing this is to send it to somewhere that can check. Tesco checkout staff can't do that.

Anyway, you have absolutely no interest in actually finding out anything new on the topic from people who actually know what they are talking about!!

I'm done here....op they aren't going to swap it for you without having it checked as lovely as that sounds so please don't get your hopes up.

joeysoap

theteal wrote: »

A warranty is a sales tool. It can be useful for resolving issues on relatively new items but it means nothing as far as your consumer rights are concerned. Manufacturers can can put an hour/week/Sundays only warranty on an item, it makes absolutely no difference in Ireland.

The 2 year EU directive was never adopted in Ireland as our own Sale of Goods Act offers much more consumer protection. The act purposely does not have stated time limits as all products are not of the same quality but instead ensures that any undamaged item should last a "reasonable" amount of time.

Ok, breaking what I posted above about last post on this to ask a question (for future purchases)

While the warranty States 1 year parts and labour, our consumer laws are stronger than a two year parts and labour ie if my TV breaks down at 23 months it must be repaired (or replaced) FREE ?

The extended warranty that retailers (Currys, Power City) sell is unnecessary?

* as it transpired the smart card in my TV went faulty at about 34 months, repaired free under extended warranty. The guy came and played around for a few mins with controls and said the card wasn't reading properly, took a photo of the card on his phone, and came back about a week later with a replacement card. Even though I bought the TV and warranty in Dundalk the repairs were carried out by a Northern Ireland company. The guy casually said the call out alone would have cost more than the extended warranty.

theteal

First question - Yes, they must repair it for free. They'll try every deflection technique they know to avoid doing so but just be confident in your knowledge of the law and exercise your rights.

Second question - generally yes those extended warranties are wasted money BUT some of them cover user damage so may be worth it

holly8

I tried to return a faulty Toshiba TV, very recently, to the store where I purchased - just inside the 3 year period. Store manager flatly refused to take it back or even entertain any discussion on consumer law. What should be my next steps?

L1011

holly8 wrote: »

I tried to return a faulty Toshiba TV, very recently, to the store where I purchased - just inside the 3 year period. Store manager flatly refused to take it back or even entertain any discussion on consumer law. What should be my next steps?

A three year warranty is likely with the manufacturer so you can go to them if it is - and you want to deal with them. Consumer rights rest with the retailer, though.

Registered letter to the stores HQ (assuming Tesco - Gresham House, Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire I believe) outlining the fault, copy of the receipt etc.

Sleeper12

holly8 wrote:

I tried to return a faulty Toshiba TV, very recently, to the store where I purchased - just inside the 3 year period. Store manager flatly refused to take it back or even entertain any discussion on consumer law. What should be my next steps?

The 3 years warranty is with the manufacturer. They will repair it within the 3 years but you haven't a hope a new TV at this stage unless they can't repair it.
Even under the sale of goods act that you have with the retailer wouldn't get you a new TV after 3 years.

joeysoap

Was in a camera shop yesterday and they had a few 'demo' models for sale. Interested in a Nikon 3400D. But the most guarantee they would give was 6 months, and this was also on the sticker on the the box. Assume consumer legislation would also apply in this case? (Didn't purchase as it was advertised in the window with a VR lens but the shop owner copped that the lens was non VR when he checked it, was reasonable but not a giveaway (€400) but I want a VR lens, so no sale.

Sleeper12

joeysoap wrote:

Was in a camera shop yesterday and they had a few 'demo' models for sale. Interested in a Nikon 3400D. But the most guarantee they would give was 6 months, and this was also on the sticker on the the box. Assume consumer legislation would also apply in this case? (Didn't purchase as it was advertised in the window with a VR lens but the shop owner copped that the lens was non VR when he checked it, was reasonable but not a giveaway (€400) but I want a VR lens, so no sale.

A demo model isn't considered new as far as the sale of goods act is concerned afaik.

L1011

Sleeper12 wrote: »

A demo model isn't considered new as far as the sale of goods act is concerned afaik.

The Sale of Goods Act has no concept of "new". The word isn't even in it (or the 1893 Act).

The item has to be of merchantable quality, fit for purpose etc even if its actually second hand - if sold by a business. However, if its explained to you that an item is used/shop soiled etc this has to be taken in to consideration.

If the item is visible worn etc, 6 months is probably reasonable. If its not, and it fails after 6 months but within a reasonable period you would probably have a case if it had to go to court.

Be aware that any included rechargeable batteries will be in a much reduced state after months of demo use and are reasonably considered to be consumables.

joeysoap

Camera was to all intents brand new. Owner said reps got them to demonstrate to retailers the workings of the camera, fully checked and re- calibrated etc by Nikon and the battery and straps were brand new in the box. I was really set to buy it (even with the 6 months guarantee) but when the owner took the lens cover off the lens it didn't specify VR. I might have been on a sticky wicket there as the shop had advertised VR in the window, but that sales 'blurb' would have been binned after the camera was removed. The owner to give him his due pointed it out straight away when he noticed. I would not have noticed until I got it home, TBH. There are some really honest guys out there.

joeysoap

(Apologies nothing to do with TV not working) Update: £405 John Lewis (free uk postage - address pal ) 2 year guarantee Nikon D3400 VR lens. That's not a bad price, could get better if Teresa May keeps talking

Potential-Monke

Hey, OP, this is all you need:

Section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 as amended by Section 10 of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980.

14.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act and of any statute in that behalf, there is no implied condition or warranty as to the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale.

(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract are of merchantable quality...

That covers everything. The goods are expected to be of merchantable quality and fit for purpose. A HD TV that was expensive enough would be more than covered in this, so long as no user fault is found. You make contact with Tesco, explain the situation, and if they start dismissing you, simply state "Under Section 10 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 as amended by Section 10 the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980, this product is not fit for purpose". Most agents won't have a clue what to say to that and will usually get a "supervisor" to come on a try the same, just quote the act again and eventually you'll get someone who will progress it for you. Make sure they know that the issue is between yourself and Tesco, not the tv manufacturer. Tesco are the supplier, they deal with the manufacturer.

Trust me, just went through a similar (but slightly different due to Flexirent) experience and that's how it was eventually sorted. That law covers you, you don't need to know any other law. Bottom line is that TV (depending on make, price, etc) should last a reasonable amount of time, and in my case, €1200 for a tv to have a defect after 23 months is not reasonable.

holly8

holly8 wrote: »

I tried to return a faulty Toshiba TV, very recently, to the store where I purchased - just inside the 3 year period. Store manager flatly refused to take it back or even entertain any discussion on consumer law. What should be my next steps?

Well Tesco has done EVERYTHING - or NOTHING - to avoid dealing directly with my TVs (2 of them faulty) issue.

Following in-shop dispute with one very rude Tesco store manager back in Dec , I returned with the TVs a few more times only to be told that rude store manager was the boss and no one there could do anything without his say so. Tesco mgr never acknowledged or returned any of my visits, phone calls or written correspondence, despite receiving assurances that he would do so.

I also contacted Tesco Tech Support Hotline. Following weeks of constant argument with them, both by email and on the phone, and escalation to supervisors, the Tesco Hotline deemed the TVs to be beyond repair and to have a zero value ... zero, as far as Tesco was concerned. Didn't matter that customer was several €100s out of pocket with 2 faulty TVs.

This was without any inspection or additional information, simply based on the original purchase price. They kept quoting me UK consumer law - I very much enjoyed informing them that Ireland is not part of the UK! Tech Hotline informed me that this was the end of the matter as far as they were concerned and there would be no more correspondence from them. Basically Go Away. End Of.

I then contacted Tesco Customer Service in Ireland by email - following several ignored emails, CS eventually replied saying TVs were out of warranty. Again quoting SOG Act, and more emailing, CS eventually replied with a phone number for the tv manufacturer advising I contact manufacturer directly.

I refused, indicating that it was up to the Seller to follow through with manufacturer directly, and not the Buyer.

Another few emails later to and fro, Tesco CS finally indicated that someone would be in contact with me later that day to resolve the issue issue. No indication given as to who or why. And no phone call that day.

I did get a call about a week later from a tech support company in Ireland (for the manufacturer, I think?) who were great in terms of Customer Service. The TVs were returned and I got a call last week to say full refund on the way ... directly from the manufacturer!!

So while am very happy with end result, I think it is all deserved .. both TVs were only used a handful of times.

But it took a lot of time ... Tesco was useless in terms of customer service .. I am still waiting on a reply to an email sent 15 days ago.

whiterebel

Well done, perseverance paid off.