Currys......A Joke!

[lewnics]

I bought a laptop in may 07, i opened it and set it up as per normal - i am a dj and this was to be a back up laptop. Everything seemed fine and recovery disc was created etc so i packed it away. I have used it about 6 times since it was bought, on the third occasion i noticed the time was about 5 or 6 mins slow, so i manually reset it and carried on, the 4th time of using it it was slow again so again i manually reset it and also carried out a recovery using the recovery disc i had to create when first bought, anyway it happened a further twice so yesterday (Aug 25th) i took it to curry's to report the problem, they told me to phone thier support line which i did, the support line could only offer a repair, which i didn't want so i asked for a refund or exchange. I was told to discuss with the shop so went back in. the shop basically told me same thing - ie only a repair, i explianed that i wished a refund or exchange as per the sale of goods act, he basically refused and said i was talking twaddle - so i went home, looked at the Sale Of Goods act and printed of parts of it, so i went back and again requested a refund or exchange, i showed the manager the sale of goods act which i printed off and he said he had to speak to the store manager in order to get his decision, the store manager refused to even look at my print off and told me he would only consider a repair, the conversation did get a little heated and i raised my voice loud enough for the customer behind to hear me (However not swearing etc), anyway the store manager decided i was acting aggressivley( which i dont know how he got that) and phoned the police, i have just had them come to the house to take a statement. The police have said that i problelbly have a case but its a civil matter and as far as they are concerened thier bits finished with and no further action will happen with them.

 

" PART 5A

 

ADDITIONAL RIGHTS OF BUYER IN CONSUMER CASES

 

48A Introductory

 

 

(1) This section applies if -

(a) the buyer deals as consumer or, in Scotland, there is a consumer contract in which the buyer is a consumer, and

 

(b) the goods do not conform to the contract of sale at the time of delivery.

(2) If this section applies, the buyer has the right -

(a) under and in accordance with section 48B below, to require the seller to repair or replace the goods, or

 

(b) under and in accordance with section 48C below -

(i) to require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or

 

(ii) to rescind the contract with regard to the goods in question.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date.

(4) Subsection (3) above does not apply if -

(a) it is established that the goods did so conform at that date;

 

(b) its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

 

Sale of Goods Act Quick Facts

Subject: Sale of Goods Act, Faulty Goods.

Relevant or Related Legislation: Sale of Goods Act 1979. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002.

Key Facts:

• Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back.

• For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).

• If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty)

• After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

 

 

I have placed the text i was referring to in bold, if the manager had at least taken the bother to read what i had printed rather than just sticking to a protocol that seemed to favour the company rather than sticking to the letter of the law re the sale of goods act then we wouldn't have got to this stage. So what do you guys think?

 

PS Yes it was 112 days between purchase and reporting the problem, simply due to it being a intermittent problem, and the lasptop has only been used a maximum of 6 possibly 7 times during that period. I have attempted both a recovery and manual resetting during that time. It may be a CMOS battery however in oredr to get to that i would need to peel a warrenty sticker away which i wasn't happy about doing.

[Bookworm]

Well, normally, I would totally agree with you (and I do in the case of the law, and SOGA etc... on principle), but am I reading this right? You want a replacement because the clock is too slow?

[lewnics]

a replacement would have been accepted yesterday as i needed a working l;aptop last night, (ended up borrowing a mates) the slow clock is actually critical to my work that i do, a lot of it is time managed.

 

Now however as a matter of principal i wish to get my money back and will buy a laptop from a more customer orientated company rather than this shower of .....ok you get my feelings lol

[gyzmo]

I doubt very much you will get a replacement or a refund for this. It is unreasonable to expect one. The only way I would agree to one is if repairing it would cause significant inconvenience in comparison to replacement or refunding. I cannot see how that would happen. I can't even say that teh clock's speed or accuracy is relevant - a court would simply say that you should use some other function - like a watch.

[lewnics]

Why is the computer clock so important?

 

Many software that run on your system and even on remote servers depend on an accurate system clock. If your computer time is incorrect many things could go wrong. Some of the puzzling computer problems you may have could be simply because of an incorrect system clock. In fact you might even end up spending a lot of time trying to fix a problem that can be set right by just adjusting your computer clock.

Wrong email time-stamps!

 

Email clients use the local system clock to time-stamp email messages. If your system clock is not set properly the email time-stamps will be incorrect. This has a number of bad side effects.

• Your email messages will get classified as spam
  
• Your email messages will appear to be from the past or future. Some spammers use this technique to make their messages always appear on the top when sorted by date and time. This will also annoy many people.
  
• Your messages will be ignored because it will not appear as a new mail when sorted.

Malfunctioning system alerts and software controlled schedules

 

Any alerts and schedules you have setup on your system depend on your computer clock. These include system scans for anti-virus updates, operating system updates etc.

 

Possibly disastrous consequences for your online business

 

Do you use any software tools to alert you when your domain names are to be renewed, an important bill is to paid? Any alerts generated by the software will be based on your system clock and could be completely wrong

 

Browser problems on websites that use timed cookies for authentication

 

If you use websites that require logging in and you might find that you are simply unable to login. This is because most sites use cookies to hold the authentication information. These cookies have an expiry time and these depend on your system clock. If your computer time is wrong the cookies will be set with wrong expiry time.

 

Inaccurate local file time stamps

 

The files and directories you create or edit on your system will be stamped with the wrong time and date. This can create a lot of problems if you use an incremental backup software to backup your system. Incremental backups depend on backing up only the files that have changed and if your system date or time is wrong, this will simply not work as intended.

 

 

perhaps that wil explain that the pc clock is important

[kabukiman]

Doesn't the clock set itself over the net connection?

I bet the manager attended one of those company training courses, where they learn to fob the customers off, take a leaf outta the nationwide adverts, "we don't do that here" and the most important one not to go down without a fight.

[lewnics]

the clock may well take updates over the net, however what if you do not use a laptop on the net? Many of my dj'ing collegues do not allow thier work laptops to be used on the net as they do not wish to transmit or catch virus etc.

 

at the end of the day your watch wont connect to the net to get the time does it?

[patdavies]

AFAIK, in all my years in the industry, there has never been any guarantee that the CMOS clock is accurate. I have a laptop and a PC on my desk, if set the same they will have drifted apart by a couple of minutes within a couple of weeks. Normally failure of the CMOS battery first manifests itself as a failure of the computer to retain the clock at all when the computer is switched off. I have seen slow running clocks caused by the CMOS battery starting to fail; but in this case, the computer would retain its usual accuracy whilst powered up.

 

The on-screen clock derived from the CPU clock chip (note, not the CPU speed) and is simply a free running crystal oscillator with a conversion of the number of cycles to 'time'.

 

A computer clock is not updated by the internet unless you have a specific program running to do this. This usually presents the remote clock in place of the local clock. In order for the local clock to be reset, any such program and its internet link would need to be given access to your computer's BIOS - definitely not a good idea.

[bluelotus]

Doesn't the clock set itself over the net connection?

I bet the manager attended one of those company training courses, where they learn to fob the customers off, take a leaf outta the nationwide adverts, "we don't do that here" and the most important one not to go down without a fight.

You don't actually live in the real world, do you?

 

A course in fobbing off customers!!???

 

GET REAL!

 

As for you LEWNICS, if your actions resulted in the police being called, I can just imagine how you behaved. A slightly raised voice? I doubt it. If you really believe that you can influence people by raising your voice then you are mistaken. You were offered the service of qualified engineers and declined. Your choice. But, you do not have the right to demand as an alternative a refund or replacement. Proof of the fault must first be established and then appropriate action taken. (not necessarily a refund or replacement)

Acting agressively/shouting or other actions deemed inapropriate by the store staff will result in you being asked to leave the store and if you have behaved in such a manner to result in police action you should be ashamed.

I have spent 15 years plus in retail and am sickened by the number of times people imagine that intimidation will improve their case.

I have said this before, and will say it again, treat people as you would have them treat you.

On a practical note, if you really feel that your laptop is not up to merchandisable quality, have it independently checked and send the report with copies of receipts to Currys customer service with a covering letter and ask them to take action. If it really is a fault from new then you will be entitled to a replacement or refund.

[lewnics]

You don't actually live in the real world, do you?

 

A course in fobbing off customers!!???

 

GET REAL!

 

As for you LEWNICS, if your actions resulted in the police being called, I can just imagine how you behaved. A slightly raised voice? I doubt it. If you really believe that you can influence people by raising your voice then you are mistaken. You were offered the service of qualified engineers and declined. Your choice. But, you do not have the right to demand as an alternative a refund or replacement. Proof of the fault must first be established and then appropriate action taken. (not necessarily a refund or replacement)

Acting agressively/shouting or other actions deemed inapropriate by the store staff will result in you being asked to leave the store and if you have behaved in such a manner to result in police action you should be ashamed.

I have spent 15 years plus in retail and am sickened by the number of times people imagine that intimidation will improve their case.

I have said this before, and will say it again, treat people as you would have them treat you.

On a practical note, if you really feel that your laptop is not up to merchandisable quality, have it independently checked and send the report with copies of receipts to Currys customer service with a covering letter and ask them to take action. If it really is a fault from new then you will be entitled to a replacement or refund.

 

How long have you worked as a currys store manager?

[bluelotus]

How long have you worked as a currys store manager?

In answer to your direct question, never. As to how long I have been in retailing, over 15 years. This gives me more than sufficient experience to offer advice. If you choose to use that advice or not, that is for you to choose. If you do want help and advice in resolving your problem then I am more than willing to give up my personal time here.

[Bookworm]

But, you do not have the right to demand as an alternative a refund or replacement. Proof of the fault must first be established and then appropriate action taken. (not necessarily a refund or replacement)

On a practical note, if you really feel that your laptop is not up to merchandisable quality, have it independently checked and send the report with copies of receipts to Currys customer service with a covering letter and ask them to take action. If it really is a fault from new then you will be entitled to a replacement or refund.

 

WRONG! Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

If the item is less than 6 months old, it is up to the seller to prove that it is NOT faulty, not for the customer to prove it is. SOGA is VERY clear on this. The item in question was bought in May 07 (see post #1), well within the 6 months deadline. Whatever issue thee may be, the burden of proof does not lie with OP.

[bluelotus]

WRONG! Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

If the item is less than 6 months old, it is up to the seller to prove that it is NOT faulty, not for the customer to prove it is. SOGA is VERY clear on this. The item in question was bought in May 07 (see post #1), well within the 6 months deadline. Whatever issue thee may be, the burden of proof does not lie with OP.

 

So, in essence what you are advocating is that any consumer can take goods back to a retailer at any time within six months of purchase and expect a replacement/refund merely by stating that the goods are faulty?

 

I believe, in this instance, that the problem lies with Lewnics not being willing to follow a practical route of allowing the appropriately trained engineers the opportunity to test and repair or recommend replacement of the laptop. Currys are not being unreasonable in seeking to verify a fault and put things right, are they? As you stated, the burden of proof lies with the retailer. So, let them have a chance to do so.

 

Further, having read the first post in this thread, you will be aware that Lewnics actions and behaviour, in the store, lead to the police being involved, does that strike you as the normal response to a customer returning potentialy faulty goods?

[ForestChav]

They are perfectly entitled to inspect the machine in order to do so though.

 

If they are saying it's not faulty and have enough evidence to suggest so then that's obviously different.

[bluelotus]

They are perfectly entitled to inspect the machine in order to do so though.

 

If they are saying it's not faulty and have enough evidence to suggest so then that's obviously different.

 

Spot on!

[Surfer01]

Problem is that all these managers who have been on the fob off course need a kick up their backsides. I have had issues with items less than 28 days old and on occasions have had to raise my voice in order for them to get the issue resolved. Alhough not a laptop issue I had to do thsi in Currys in order to get a problem resolved and then it only happened because I threatened them with legal action.

I get extremely annoyed when I have a problem with goods purchased and the monkey imitating a manager does not show the slightest bit if concern and just looks at you blank and states, "Can't help you, email write, phone an 0870 number, walk there if you want to compalin I have no interest in your problem. Now let me get on my my life".

[Bookworm]

So, in essence what you are advocating is that any consumer can take goods back to a retailer at any time within six months of purchase and expect a replacement/refund merely by stating that the goods are faulty?

 

I believe, in this instance, that the problem lies with Lewnics not being willing to follow a practical route of allowing the appropriately trained engineers the opportunity to test and repair or recommend replacement of the laptop. Currys are not being unreasonable in seeking to verify a fault and put things right, are they? As you stated, the burden of proof lies with the retailer. So, let them have a chance to do so.

 

Further, having read the first post in this thread, you will be aware that Lewnics actions and behaviour, in the store, lead to the police being involved, does that strike you as the normal response to a customer returning potentialy faulty goods?

 

I don't believe I stated that anywhere. I did pick up on the fact that you are telling OP to get the item verified independently and get reports etc, when this is blatantly not the case within the first 6 months of purchase.

 

My comments are purely from SOGA point of view. As for the rest, you weren't there, I wasn't either, I believe it is therefore inappropriate to either you or me passing judgment on speculation as to what behaviour took place or not within the store at the time.

 

My opinion, and that's all it is, is that OP would be unlikely to be successful in a straightforward refund request, unless he can prove a) that a 100% accurate clock is an essential tool of his work, b) that such a fault, if that is what it is, is not repairable, and therefore that sending it for repairs won't make a blind bit of difference. My knowledge of PC clocks is not sufficient to comment further than that.

 

Strictly speaking, from SOGA point of view, if the laptop was bought because an accurate clock was a necessity, then there is a question as to fitness of purpose, at least in theory. On the other hand, if it was bought for the sole purpose of DJing, and that is the OP's job, it could be argued SOGA won't apply anyway, as it could be argued he bought in the course of a business, but again, that is conjecture on my behalf.

 

Small side comment: You are commenting on people's attitude to retailers, but your posts in response to other users are themselves of a confrontational and dismissive attitude:

You don't actually live in the real world, do you?

 

A course in fobbing off customers!!???

 

GET REAL!

for example.

 

As for the course in fobbing off customers, it may not be called that, but there are plenty of companies who use precisely this kind of method. If you don't believe it, you must have missed the Whistleblower investigation a few months back, or the recent leaked bank memos, as they both show exactly that. And we're talking of some of the top 5 banks here. It is very sweet (if somewhat naive) of you to think that there is no such thing, but there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. :-|

[bluelotus]

Problem is that all these managers who have been on the fob off course need a kick up their backsides. I have had issues with items less than 28 days old and on occasions have had to raise my voice in order for them to get the issue resolved. Alhough not a laptop issue I had to do thsi in Currys in order to get a problem resolved and then it only happened because I threatened them with legal action.

I get extremely annoyed when I have a problem with goods purchased and the monkey imitating a manager does not show the slightest bit if concern and just looks at you blank and states, "Can't help you, email write, phone an 0870 number, walk there if you want to compalin I have no interest in your problem. Now let me get on my my life".

 

Very informed comments, and such eloquence. I feel humbled to be in such company.

[bluelotus]

I don't believe I stated that anywhere. I did pick up on the fact that you are telling OP to get the item verified independently and get reports etc, when this is blatantly not the case within the first 6 months of purchase.

 

My comments are purely from SOGA point of view. As for the rest, you weren't there, I wasn't either, I believe it is therefore inappropriate to either you or me passing judgment on speculation as to what behaviour took place or not within the store at the time.

 

My opinion, and that's all it is, is that OP would be unlikely to be successful in a straightforward refund request, unless he can prove a) that a 100% accurate clock is an essential tool of his work, b) that such a fault, if that is what it is, is not repairable, and therefore that sending it for repairs won't make a blind bit of difference. My knowledge of PC clocks is not sufficient to comment further than that.

 

Strictly speaking, from SOGA point of view, if the laptop was bought because an accurate clock was a necessity, then there is a question as to fitness of purpose, at least in theory. On the other hand, if it was bought for the sole purpose of DJing, and that is the OP's job, it could be argued SOGA won't apply anyway, as it could be argued he bought in the course of a business, but again, that is conjecture on my behalf.

 

Small side comment: You are commenting on people's attitude to retailers, but your posts in response to other users are themselves of a confrontational and dismissive attitude:

for example.

 

As for the course in fobbing off customers, it may not be called that, but there are plenty of companies who use precisely this kind of method. If you don't believe it, you must have missed the Whistleblower investigation a few months back, or the recent leaked bank memos, as they both show exactly that. And we're talking of some of the top 5 banks here. It is very sweet (if somewhat naive) of you to think that there is no such thing, but there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. :-|

 

I mentioned getting an independent report as the poster seemed unwilling to allow Currys to confirm the fault.

 

As to his behaviour, that the police, by his own admission, were involved seems, to me, evidence of something more than a normal reaction of a retailer to a customer complaint.

 

In fifteen years of retailing, mainly in the electrical side, I have never, ever come across any course in fobbing off customers. A lot of training goes into improving customer service and great emphasis is placed on improving customer relations. The idea that business could be improved by this practice is absurd. You mention the banking trade, I have no knowledge of that, only retail. If such practice exists in banking then it should be roundly condemned.

 

I came into this thread with the intention of helping and now realise that what folk really want is a platform from which to ridicule.

 

I see no profit in my continuing to offer assistance.

[kabukiman]

Thats business talk, there is never profit just satisfaction.

Involving the police could just mean the manager was inadequate in dealing with the matter. If the guy was arrested or cautioned you would have a point.

[blitz]

Can't see the SOGA linked anywhere about it being a repair over a replacement, and I like correcting incorrect SOGA statements.

Under the sales of goods act 1979 (as amended) section 48:

 

48A.

(1) This section applies if—

(a) the buyer deals as consumer or, in Scotland, there is a consumer contract in which the buyer is a consumer, and

(b) the goods do not conform to the contract of sale at the time of delivery.

(2) If this section applies, the buyer has the right—

(a) under and in accordance with section 48B below, to require the seller to repair or replace the goods, or

(b) under and in accordance with section 48C below—

(i) to require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or

(ii) to rescind the contract with regard to the goods in question.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date. (Up to retailer to prove within 6 months)

(4) Subsection (3) above does not apply if—

(a) it is established that the goods did so conform at that date;

(b) its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

 

48B.

(1) If section 48A above applies, the buyer may require the seller—

(a) to repair the goods, or

(b) to replace the goods.

(2) If the buyer requires the seller to repair or replace the goods, the seller must—

(a) repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience to the buyer;

(b) bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).

(3) The buyer must not require the seller to repair or, as the case may be, replace the goods if that remedy is—

(a) impossible, or

(b) disproportionate in comparison to the other of those remedies, or (Meaning that its up to the retailer to decide a replacement or repair)

© disproportionate in comparison to an appropriate reduction in the purchase price under paragraph (a), or rescission under paragraph (b), of section 48C(1) below.

(4) One remedy is disproportionate in comparison to the other if the one imposes costs on the seller which, in comparison to those imposed on him by the other, are unreasonable, taking into account—

(a) the value which the goods would have if they conformed to the contract of sale,

(b) the significance of the lack of conformity, and

© whether the other remedy could be effected without significant inconvenience to the buyer.

(5) Any question as to what is a reasonable time or significant inconvenience is to be determined by reference to—

(a) the nature of the goods, and

(b) the purpose for which the goods were acquired. .

 

 

if goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back.

This line is incorrect and has been truncated from the factsheet it came from. (The berr sales of goods act Quick facts) Sale of Goods Act Quick Facts - BERR