I need help with PC World!

[demon_x_slash]

The whole point of this forum is to give the consumer advice...y'know...Consumer Action Group...?

[Marilyn22]

When i rang the tech guys i said that i had not used the laptop for a week, it has been on my desk in its hard protective bag with nothing on top of it. When i went to use it again i described the screen as being one half white one half blue with black spots over it. They just replied youve dropped it it will cost you £350 to be repaired. When i took it into PC world the bloke said he wasnt an expert didnt even turn the thing on and then said no youve dropped it!! I then replied but your not an expert so how would you know? Which he repiled ive seen it before and its been dropped! Its amazing how they could diagnose it without turning it on isnt it!!?! There is not a scratch on the laptop and i know for a fact i have not misused droped or roughly used it! Still waiting on the replies by the way!!

[JonCris]

Doesn't matter what they say. Less than 6 months old so they have to prove it or refund your money.

 

Strongly advise you take pictures of it for later reference should it suddenly 'aquire' some visible damage when you return it

 

Also don't hang about take it to the nearest PCW explaining it's a long way to travel & request either an exchange or your money back. You might even find they are more reasonable than the bunch your currently trying to deal with

[noiseboy135db]

Just a minor point,

 

I have two laptops which do get dropped, thrown about in soft bags, sat on & stood on by my baby (while in their bags), and I have not had any problems so far. one is two years old, the other is 9 months old. I have had many gadgets in the past that I have killed and through experience there is, generally speaking, only components that people have admitted to prior knowledge of problems that tend to go in instances like this case.

 

Most technology can take a lot of abuse as our lifestyles dictate that.

 

For something to go like that, so soon after purchase I would immediately suspect component fault, It is just a shame that PC World staff (generally, we have one good guy locally) are not experienced enough, normally in shoelace tying, let alone computers or customer service, to realise that it really is down to them to sort it out

 

Just my twopenneth!

[Larkrise]

Don't despair - I have just sued PC World through the Small Claims Court and WON.

 

My son bought a laptop in October 2005 for, amongst other things, gaming and store recommended a particular Toshiba as being all singing ,all dancing etc..

 

Within a week suffered multiple crashes and obviously not suitable - took back to store to be told "we don't do refunds" and laptops were not suitable for games!!!. Cutting a very long story very short - we got no satisfaction from store (Chester) or Head Office, so referred to Consumer Direct and on to local Trading Standards.

 

Were told we had every right to a full refund as :- a) faulty at purchase and/or b) not suitable for specified use. Trading Standards helped draft letters and firmly believed that we would receive refund almot immediately.

 

PC World maintained their arrogant anti-consumer stance and we eventually got our day in court last December 2006.

 

We heard today, February 23 2007, that the Court had found in our favour as the Laptop did not do what the salesman said it would.

 

It's been a lengthy campaign but we were not going to be bullied out of our rights -I strongly recommend anyone with similar problems not to be fobbed off with PC World blatant bullying tactics - remain calm and refer to Consumer Direct.

[JonCris]

Great! Well done.

 

No allowance made for 'wear & tear' then?

 

Yours is not the 1st & it certainly won't be the last where 'full' refunds have been obtained/awarded some time after purchase

[Rich44]

Dropped it my backside...

 

Colour faults on laptop screens CAN be caused by dropping it BUT its not the only cause another could be a faulty invertor causing the backlight to fail/not illuminate properly which is a VERY common fault with laptops I see it several times a week.

 

Not to mention it would be fairly obvious if it were dropped there would most likely be some form of impact damage usually around the hinge areas or some scuffing but even that is not proof of dropping. I find it highly unlikely that PCW staff are of a high enough skill to make that determination even as a computer engineer of 12 years I would be reluctant to make that call as I do not make laptops its for a manufacturer to make that call

[Darrylles]

Hi,

 

I know that their hasn't been any massive 'press' release regarding the way that Trading Standards have been given more empowerment (or money) to act.

I'm surprised, especially as the government need some good reviews right now, but through personal experience I can testify that Trading Standards are a lot more pro-active in coming forward and taking large (or small) companies on - head-on.

 

I was shocked by Trading Standards attitude to handling companies that are obviously breaking the law. They swept me off my feet, took control and sorted it.

 

If a law is being broken (this is key - a law must be broken by the company) - Trading Standards will take responsibility of your case - period. They will resolve it - period.

It will not cost you a penny, nor will you need to do anything apart from make a statement and corroborate it with a signature - done.

 

With large companies, I would imagine that your case would be resolved within a week or two - simply with Trading Standards involvement, however, that company will still be fined by Trading Standards to recoup the cost of having to have a Trading Standards organisation.

 

If this 'large company' decides next time to NOT resolve the customer issue quickly (because Trading Standards are going to fine them regardless), then Trading Standards will take this into account and penalise them even more.

 

Contact Trading Standards, and come back to this thread to let us know how your problem was resolved.

 

ATB

 

Darrylles

[rosiecotton]

Trading Standards have no powers to act in civil law. This means that they cannot enforce, say, the Sale of Goods Act or the Supply of Goods and Services Act. Only a small claims court can do this. They have not been "given" any more empowerments and certainly no more money!

 

Some TS departments are better resourced than others, and can assist in cases and attempt to mediate. Others do this for just the most vulnerable members of society. Other TS departments do not offer any civil intervention or advice at all. It all depends on resources. None of them can force traders to take any particular course of action. They cannot guarantee to resolve anything for you if it is a civil matter, such as those detailed in this thread, simply because they do not have the legal powers. They cannot fine companies for failing to comply with the Sale of Goods Act in individual cases, for example.

 

If a trader is continually acting "to the consumer's detriment" it is possible that they can take Enterprise Act action to stop this practice, but again it won't necessarily resolve individual cases unless the trader agrees in informal talks.

 

Just trying to clarify what TS can and cannot do

 

 

 

Hi,

 

I know that their hasn't been any massive 'press' release regarding the way that Trading Standards have been given more empowerment (or money) to act.

I'm surprised, especially as the government need some good reviews right now, but through personal experience I can testify that Trading Standards are a lot more pro-active in coming forward and taking large (or small) companies on - head-on.

 

I was shocked by Trading Standards attitude to handling companies that are obviously breaking the law. They swept me off my feet, took control and sorted it.

 

If a law is being broken (this is key - a law must be broken by the company) - Trading Standards will take responsibility of your case - period. They will resolve it - period.

It will not cost you a penny, nor will you need to do anything apart from make a statement and corroborate it with a signature - done.

 

With large companies, I would imagine that your case would be resolved within a week or two - simply with Trading Standards involvement, however, that company will still be fined by Trading Standards to recoup the cost of having to have a Trading Standards organisation.

 

If this 'large company' decides next time to NOT resolve the customer issue quickly (because Trading Standards are going to fine them regardless), then Trading Standards will take this into account and penalise them even more.

 

Contact Trading Standards, and come back to this thread to let us know how your problem was resolved.

 

ATB

 

Darrylles

[rosiecotton]

Great! Well done.

 

No allowance made for 'wear & tear' then?

 

Yours is not the 1st & it certainly won't be the last where 'full' refunds have been obtained/awarded some time after purchase

 

 

In this case the goods were clearly faulty from the outset so the consumer had a strong argument in court that they had had no wear and tear from the item. Had they been able to use it for a year or so, the case would probably have been different.

[JonCris]

In this case the goods were clearly faulty from the outset so the consumer had a strong argument in court that they had had no wear and tear from the item. Had they been able to use it for a year or so, the case would probably have been different.

 

That is NOT what you have stated on other threads

[Darrylles]

Hi RosieCotton,

 

All that I can say, is that Trading Standards acted a whole lot more robustly 1 month ago to a problem that I had, compared with 7 years ago with a similar problem.

 

I had the 'trader' blocked-in with police cars at my drive within minutes of calling Trading Standards. 7 years ago - well, I would have waited until my grave was unrecognisable through the weeds.

 

Rosie - please explain the reason for the difference in reaction by Trading Standards from years ago, if no difference in resource has occurred since then.

 

Rosie: Please differentiate between 'civil' law and 'criminal' law. Is it simply a case of how high you get up the ladder of influence and money? I.e. A director of Microsoft knows the prime minister - therefore - that is 'civil' law? If you are a director of an identical company that is just starting out - then that is 'criminal' law?

 

If a company sells you something, and refuses to recognise consumer law - is that not a criminal offence?

 

I appreciate that you are trying to state exactly what the TS department can and cannot do. Is there not a central location where this is made plain? Is TS resource so varied across counties? If so - why? I'm sure that you would want consistency across the country - if not why is it not?

 

Regards,

 

Darrylles

[rosiecotton]

That is NOT what you have stated on other threads

 

It is; on other threads the posters had clearly had usage from the product, this was unuseable from the outset - there is a difference.

[rosiecotton]

Criminal law would be (examples): Trade Descriptions Act, General Product Safety Regs, Consumer Protection Act etc. If you had an unsolicited trader on your property who was not giving you cancellation rights, this is a criminal offence and Trading Standards Officers do go out to people's houses (or liaise with the police to do so) on such complaints as often such traders can be rogue traders who prey on the vulnerable.

 

Civil law is (example): the Sale of Goods Act, Supply of Goods and Services Act, contract law. Trading Standards does not have any legal powers to enforce this, even if a company are refusing to honour a consumer's statutory rights. Only a court can do this.

 

It is nothing to do with who you are, just different pieces of legislation are classified as criminal or civil, and go through different courts. TS can only enforce specific criminal trading legislation, not the civil ones, with the exception of the Enterprise Act, but that Act can only be used against "persistent offenders" - those who pose a threat to consumers as a whole.

 

Trading Standards departments in general throughout the country are suffering from a distinct cut in resources, as a local government department they are generally being told that their budget will be reduced year after year due to lower grants from central government etc. Staff are not being replaced and some functions are not being carried out, and it does depend on where you live to an extent to determine what level of service you will receive. It is a bit of a postcode lottery, and this is all because of different levels of funding. Consumer advice and assistance is not a statutory function of Trading Standards departments, so it is often this that suffers when cuts have to be made.

 

Example: If you live in Somerset, their Trading Standards department does not provide consumer advice or assistance, they do not employ any staff in this role. This is largely due to budget restraints and their priorities being in different areas. Therefore consumers within this area will not receive assistance in resolving civil complaints (breaches of the Sale of Goods Act etc).

 

If you live in Dorset, the neighbouring county, some advice and assistance may be possible if you are vulnerable and are having difficulty being able to resolve the matter yourself, or if the matter is complex. Again, as a county Dorset's resources are pretty stretched but they do offer a level of service in this area. They employ one full time equivalent civil advice and intervention officer.

 

Other counties have several staff still working in civil advice and intervention and they may be able to offer assistance to more people.

 

It really does depend on where you live, how the service is resourced and how the money is spent. In an ideal world there would be consistency of service but sadly - due to budget constraints and functions not being statutory - that is not the case.

[Bookworm]

One thing that people on this forum are overlooking is that there are two sides to this story, the consumer who says that the product has failed through normal use and the retailer who says it's been abused. Without seeing the product to confirm who is correct, no one on this forum is entitled to say what the retailer should do to resolve the problem, if anything, or what the consumer can go into store and demand.

 

That is totally irrelevant in this instance.

 

OP was denied his/her statutory rights in the instance described: As I said from my first post, within 6 months of purchase, the onus is on the retailer to prove fault, which can not be done by a cursory glance at item.

Therefore, everyone in this forum vaguely aware of SOGA, was totally entitled to say what they did, which seems to be a good deal more than PC World were prepared to do in this case.

 

Imagine the matter ends up in court: "How can you prove to me that item was dropped by Claimant?" "Well, Sir, I looked at it." Yeah, that will wash...

[JonCris]

spike the whole idea of this site is to give help & advice to other members. We can only base that advice on what we are told by that member so your argument is spurious "how do we know" of course we don't 'know' but then neither do you. Also if we followed your line of 'logic' we might as well all pack it in now

[prushton]

under the sale of goods act , the laptop you bought must be fit for purpose. if a fault like the screen occurs within 12 mths of purchase it is deemed to have existed at the point of sale.contact trading standards if you continue to get the brush off from pc world .

 

Years ago I bought a digital camera from pc world, it was an ex display model and within 3 mths the motor packed up. I took it back and they said it would cost £250 to repair, I stated that under the sale of goods act that it must be fit for purpose and as such the fault existed when I purchased it. I was getting nowhere so I contacted trading standards and spoke to a very nice officer there who told me to take it back to pc world and inform them that they have to replace it. if I needed to I could give the pc world staff her number at trading standards and she would tell them over the phone. The end result I walked out of the store with a brand new camera.

[JonCris]

Its' 6 months not 12 as in:

 

"reversed burden of proof"

Means that for the first six months the consumer need not produce any evidence that a product was inherently faulty at the time of sale. If a consumer is seeking any other remedy the burden of proof remains with him/her.

In such a case, the retailer will either accept there was an inherent fault, and will offer a remedy, or he will dispute that it was inherently flawed. If the latter, when he inspects the product to analyse the cause, he may, for example, point out impact damage or stains that would be consistent with it having been mistreated in such a way as to bring about the fault.

This reversal of the usual burden of proof only applies when the consumer is seeking a repair or replacement. After the first six months the onus of proof is again on the consumer.

[lenny100]

I wouldn't trust any of the so called pcw technical staff. As a windows 2003 mcse with over 15 years experience in hardware repair I was told recently at a job interview with pcw ( I been out of work for a year and need a job) that i was not what they are looking for as i was to highly qualified!!!!!!!

[sn00psmum]

:lol: Ever been to Inverness PCW?? OMG:rolleyes: