• The forum software that supports hummy.tv has been upgraded to XenForo 2.3!

    Please bear with us as we continue to tweak things, and feel free to post any questions, issues or suggestions in the upgrade thread.

H/w faults within the first 6 months

jack616 said:
Sorry graham I should have said (to clarify) the seller is the person responsible for the 5 year warranty - (as people were talking about buying direct from Humax I perhaps should have made that clearer)
Appart from that my post is correct.
So for example if I buy a Fridge from Curry's and 3 years later it stops working - curry's are responsible in law for 2 years worth of whatever I paid for it.
That can be like for like or cash refund. The replacement/refund must also be provided without expense or inconvenience to myself (also written as law)

Thats how it works.
Click to expand...

That's also totally incorrect.

Suggest you read this

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-goods/understanding-the-sale-of-goods-act/

You would have to prove that

It should have lasted longer than 3 yrs

You have not contributed to it's failure for instance installed it not in accordance with instructions especially in respect of ventilation and ambient conditions. If it was a freezer in an unheated garage or similar you would have zero chance.

You can't just walk up to a retailer and say I bought this 3 years ago I want full recompense. They will laugh at you. You will have to take them to court and prove your case. It's in no way automatic.
 
My understanding of consumer rights legislation (not having read up on it recently) is that:

1. There is no contractural relationship between the consumer and the manufacturer, it's between the consumer and the retailer.

2. There is no specific period over which a 'right of redress' exists, it is what might be considered reasonable with regard to the nature and expense of the item in question. However, any fault occuring within the initial period (not sure, that might be 6 months), it would be assumed that the fault was present at the time of sale. Beyond that, it would be up to the consumer to prove that the fault was present at the time of sale.
 
My HDR-Fox T2 bought on 21 June 2011 from Currys also has this exact same problem. When I have used the information on this excellent forum to back up the recordings to my NAS drive I'll talk to Currys about what they are going to do to fix it.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering why I would ever want to buy another Humax, after my PVR-9200T failed with the leaky capacitor problem that caused the clock to stop working correctly. I've still got it so I may have to fix it to use as a stop gap if Cuurys decide to try and repair the T2.
 
Simonhk said:
Meanwhile, I'm wondering why I would ever want to buy another Humax, after my PVR-9200T failed with the leaky capacitor problem that caused the clock to stop working correctly. I've still got it so I may have to fix it to use as a stop gap if Cuurys decide to try and repair the T2.
Click to expand...
The 9200 problem is not a leaky capacitor problem; Big-les thinks it is "contaminant on the surface of the protective lacquer".
 
MartinLiddle said:
The 9200 problem is not a leaky capacitor problem; Big-les thinks it is "contaminant on the surface of the protective lacquer".
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, I stand corrected, the leaky capacitor was a radio I had. It still means that both Humax PVR's I've had have suffered manufacturing faults.
 
Simonhk said:
My HDR-Fox T2 bought on 21 June 2011 from Currys also has this exact same problem.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to know what your serial number is? I bought mine around the same time - 27 June 2011 - but from Humax Direct.
You can find my serial number for comparison on Black Hole's Serial Number thread. I think the 'relevant' part are the last 5 digits; in my case these were 00346.
 
grahamlthompson said:
Get real, you really claim to know more about the law than the Which lawyers and the government. :disagree:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Goods_Act_1979

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/

http://e-lawresources.co.uk/Statutory-implied-terms.php
Click to expand...


Sorry - I've only just seen this message.
Yes it would seem I do know more than the pages you list if they contradict what I have said..

Ignore those pages and follow what I have stated and you will be correct, legal and within european
and UK trading regulations and rights.
You right of redress is exactly as I have explained.

jack
 
And no graham - a retailer will not just "laugh" at you - unless you do as you suggest and just walk up to them.
In the case of my curries example you would need to write a letter enclosing a copy of the receipt of any other
proof of purchase (such as ban or credit card record that can identify the sale
 
oopss sorry - I just repaired my keyboard and a key was stuck splitting this message - sorry -
Anyway - do as above and include the correct legislative phrase so they know youy're not just whistling dixie and (as in my case) you should recieve
a fast refund or other offer. You are entitled to refuse offers and accept only cash if you choose.
I'll see if I can't dig out a copy of the letter and give you the phrase to use - Birmingham trading standards - (as they used to be called ) is where
I got it from after hearing all this on the Ed Doolan show on radio WM.

jack
 
OK here we go - I've cut and pasted the bottom of my letter (the example I gave was an actual case) The letter is rather terse as
the engineer mentioned was very rude and unhelpful to a dissabled OAP at the time and I was in no mood to be "nice" as a consequnce.

--------------------CUT------------------------
Last week we had a visit from your authorised repair engineer to repair a fault on a fridge freezer
we purchased from your shop approximately 3 years ago.

Unfortunately we have been extremely unsatisfied with the service provided (details below) and
as a consequence were advised to contact Consumer Direct West Midlands a government funded
trading advice organisation.

In response to this they advised us to contact you directly reminding you that under the sale of goods act of 1979 you are
required to provide a repair or like for like replacement for such goods if they be of unsatisfactory condition for up to 6 years
from the date of purchase without undue inconvenience and at no cost to ourselves.

This being the case, as instructed I now require you to comply with the above act within 14 days from the above date after which
the matter will be automatically referred to the courts. Should this become necessary you will also be held responsible for all
expenses incurred as well as damages and losses. We read the clause requiring no undue inconvenience in this case to include
disposal of the existing faulty unit as at the very least extreme inconvenience is already being suffered as below.

I look forward to your response at your earliest convenience.

---------------------CUT----------------------
As you can see- fridges are deemed viable for 6 years rather than 5 with other types of goods which I had got wrong with the above.
I hand delivered the letter to the manager and 7 days later a replacement refrigerator was delivered - installed - and the old one taken away.

I hope this real case example can close the thread now.

jack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top