Warranties

zanc

Active Member

Badger0-0

Distinguished Member
The way I see it, if you have a five year warranty, you aren't going to have a problem if it breaks down.
From having read poster's experiences on here, companies will fight tooth and nail to not repair a set much outside it's warranty.
That's at least going to cause delays, even if you manage to get any joy at all.
 

gary965

Active Member
As has been said you are fully covered in the UK for 6 years so paying for a 5 year cover is both pointless and expensive, however if you can get one free then if anything does go wrong you will in theory get it repaired with less hassle.
 

RogueViper

Standard Member
Consumers' Statutory Rights in the UK

The EU Consumer Rights Directive sets a minimum 2 year limit on claims by consumers for faulty goods; in the UK this legislation is enforced under the Sale of Goods Act and the limit is actually 6 years. Where goods are found to be faulty within 6 months of purchase, there is a presumption that they were defective at the time of sale and a full refund or replacement are normally offered. Many retailers, including Tesco extend this period to 12 months. However, the right to a refund or replacement is not automatic and faults due to mis-use or damage are not counted as defects.

If goods that are over 12 months old are found to be faulty because they were defective in manufacture, the consumer is entitled to a range of potential remedies which may include replacement but also repair or partial refund depending on the circumstances. As the consumer has already had 12 months' use of the product, it is unlikely that a full refund or replacement will be appropriate and an alternative remedy is more likely, this being determined by the retailer on the basis of the fault involved and the practicalities of effecting a repair. Different types of goods have different expected lifetimes and price paid may also be taken into account when making this decision

Therefore you are not guaranteed a refund of any sort. If you take out an extended warranty for example with Tesco you are covered for accidental damage, plus no labour costs for repairing the product, or an exchange/ refund. Therefore an extended warranty is worth it in my eyes.
 

chaosrealm

Active Member
guys .......thanks you so much my Samsung TV went pop 2 1/2 years after i bought it and i have been saving hard to get a new one i am gonna get the 42V10 then try and get my other repaired for nothing or replaced, so thank you so much for posting this info as it might hopefully get my corner fought :smashin:
 

gary965

Active Member
As someone who has worked for over 10 years for a major mail order/online company, managing a dept selling white goods, warranties are one of our biggest earners, simply because many items don't break within the first few years, or there are so many loop holes that enable us to get out of our warranty. You will have a fair chance of enforcing your rights via the sale of goods act if you are confident of your rights and go in strong at a level of management who will know the Sale of Goods Act.

Why are companies so keen to sell you warranties, is it because they care about you as a customer, or rather they know that it is so profitable?

My advice is if you can get a free or indeed cheap 5 year warranty then do so, however full price or even 3 year warranties are expensive and in effect bogus as they usually start from day of purchase, even though you are unquestionably covered for 12 months (more in many circumstances). I myself have benefitted from the 6 year rule and so have a number of my friends.
 

stranger

Well-known Member
Many older/infirm people would be unable to fight for their rights so until (if ever) consumer rights are weighted in favour of the consumer, extended warranties (preferably 'free') are necessary/preferable.
 

chaosrealm

Active Member
As someone who has worked for over 10 years for a major mail order/online company, managing a dept selling white goods, warranties are one of our biggest earners, simply because many items don't break within the first few years, or there are so many loop holes that enable us to get out of our warranty. You will have a fair chance of enforcing your rights via the sale of goods act if you are confident of your rights and go in strong at a level of management who will know the Sale of Goods Act.

Why are companies so keen to sell you warranties, is it because they care about you as a customer, or rather they know that it is so profitable?

My advice is if you can get a free or indeed cheap 5 year warranty then do so, however full price or even 3 year warranties are expensive and in effect bogus as they usually start from day of purchase, even though you are unquestionably covered for 12 months (more in many circumstances). I myself have benefitted from the 6 year rule and so have a number of my friends.

thanks gary for your comments i might consult the CAB as well just to be sure of my rights
 

gary965

Active Member
I agree up to a point that warranties give piece of mind to less confident consumers, indeed that is the way we pitch our sales, "piece of mind cover", however consider the following.

Comet a shop that many how shall we say more vulnerable, less savvy consumers use have a Panny 42" G10 for £1099 and the 5 year warranty costs £320, that is 29% of the cost of the item, piece of mind or robbery.

I have just booked a holiday to Florida for the family, total cost about £7000, the insurance was £148 for our family or 2% of the cost. I know the variables and levels of risk are different but please not that much different.
 

Graham27

Well-known Member
As has been said you are fully covered in the UK for 6 years so paying for a 5 year cover is both pointless and expensive
I believe that's incorrect :)

Under the SoGA you can make a claim for up to 6 years, you don't actually have 'cover' for 6 years. Not all claims are upheld within that 6 years, far from it. And even of the ones that are upheld, the result isn't always one that pleases the punter.

What the SoGA entitles you to is quite different from a decent warranty. Without going into all the ins and outs of it, a basic example would be a having a five year old, well-used TV that fails and is unrepairable. If your SoGA claim is upheld, you may just get a few bob compensation. With a decent warranty you'd get a new TV.

I imagine there are many warranties out there that are nothing more than a rip-off but there are a few decent value ones out there too. These can be worth considering, if you're the type of person that favours peace of mind. You just have to choose very carefully!

I've taken advantage of the SoGA myself, and have also helped a few people across various forums get what they're entitled to. I've also got many of my customers freebies/compensation that they didn't think they were entitled to. But the SoGA simply isn't a "warranty", despite what many people on MSE and HotUKdeals would tell you :D
 
Last edited:

chaosrealm

Active Member
Curry's asked me to get an engineer round to prove it was the TV and not user error....the engineers just left and i have been advised that the TV used sub standard & inferior capacitors on one of the boards so i have to wait for a full report on Monday and send it off ....so fingers crossed they will agree and get it repaired
 

gary965

Active Member
No one said it was a warranty, it is there to provide consumers with an option if their purchase is not fit for purpose. Obviously you must prove that or go in with all the information that makes the retailer believe you have a fair and winnable case.

As I explained I have sold high value and low value warranties as part of my job for years and think you need to look long and hard at the small print before you think that it is unquestioned piece of mind cover, believe me many are not, as has been proved by so many watchdog style investigations over the years and indeed by my own experiences. Warranties account for a huge percentage of the profit that we make on a £500 kitchen appliance, as many warranties are at least 30% of the items value.

I have indeed got a 5 year warranty on my new G10, as it was free, so worth the risk, as I also have the period covered by the SOGA, however I wouldn't have paid the £300 plus to buy it, but hey if that is your choice then fine.
 

Graham27

Well-known Member
Gary965 said:
No one said it was a warranty, it is there to provide consumers with an option if their purchase is not fit for purpose. Obviously you must prove that or go in with all the information that makes the retailer believe you have a fair and winnable case
I was referring to people on bargain forums that perpetuate the myth about the SoGA 6 year "warranty", such as on the sites I mentioned, MSE and HotUKdeals.

The reason I mentioned it was because the OP asked whether we need 5 year guarantees, and your response, to me, suggested he had similar rights under the SoGA...
As has been said you are fully covered in the UK for 6 years so paying for a 5 year cover is both pointless and expensive,
That, to me, could be a little misleading :) As I said in my earlier post, you have a right to claim, but no automatic right for your claim to be upheld. Even if you do win, you can't demand a refund or repair, you might just get a compensatory sum which is only a small % of the initial purchase price. So, to me, that's not being "fully covered" in the way that a decent warranty would cover you. So a warranty, which may give you a new set, isn't really pointless IMO.
As I explained I have sold high value and low value warranties as part of my job for years and think you need to look long and hard at the small print before you think that it is unquestioned piece of mind cover, believe me many are not, as has been proved by so many watchdog style investigations over the years and indeed by my own experiences
I've also plenty of experience in this field ;) I never said all warranties were a good idea, I said that they can be a good thing if you choose carefully.

I just feel that a lot of these type of topics result in people believing that the SoGA will act like a warranty, when it's very rarely the case. As I mentioned in another thread, there may well be a lot of angry TV buyers out there in a few years time, when their TV's become faulty and they realise all the hoops they have to jump through just to possibly get a paltry payment for compensation for unfulfilled lifespan. I feel that quite a few folk may well look back and wish they'd got a warranty!

As I said, I've claimed and helped others to win claims under SoGA before. I hope that I know the Act and it's implications pretty well, but I still feel there are situations where a warranty is good value. In the current market, some stores offering 5 year warranties are only a few quid more than those offering no extended warranty. In this instance, I'd tend to pay the few extra quid, providing the warranty offered stood up to scrutiny.
 
Last edited:

gary965

Active Member
No problem mate, it is just a very touchy subject for me as I have had to manage people to achieve targets driven by selling warranties which I know are vastly overpriced and have so many loop holes as to be almost useless. Thankfully I am out of that business now.

As I said I do agree that a free or cheap warranty is a good idea, but just be careful.
 

Badger0-0

Distinguished Member
Curry's asked me to get an engineer round to prove it was the TV and not user error....the engineers just left and i have been advised that the TV used sub standard & inferior capacitors on one of the boards so i have to wait for a full report on Monday and send it off ....so fingers crossed they will agree and get it repaired

Sounds like the same problem that affected Onkyo big time. This was one of the biggest cap manufacturers in the world (if not the biggest) and I suspect this is going to kick a lot of makers of all sorts in the ass.
 

petet66

Active Member
Your Sale Of Goods Act (SOGA) rights won't cover a product for natural wear and tear so usage would be taken into consideration. Under a (decent) warranty you would be entitled to a repair if your TV breaks down. Under SOGA you will potentially end up in the small claims court having to show that your TV has broken down four years after you bought it because it was faulty or not of a "satisfactory quality" when you bought it.

Having said all of that you also need to be aware of the OFT report a few years ago which slated extended warranties for being overpriced. Panasonic are currently offering a free 5 year manufacturer's warranty on some of their plasma TVs, John Lewis also offer a free five year warranty and Richer Sounds warranty is good value. Steer clear of any one wanting over £100 for an extended warranty on a £500 TV though!
 

KyleG454

Standard Member
Basically, the biggest (and most important) difference between the the SoGA and a warranty is the burden of proof. SoGA means the customer has to prove it's a manufacturing defect after six months, a warranty means the retailer/manufacturer has to prove it's not faulty.

And in many cases, you'll struggle to prove it's a manufacturing defect. Therefore, there is some value in the warranty, though I would agree the majority are very over priced.
 

fortyfive

Standard Member
I know for a fact, that the insurance company(cornhill) got only 8% of the warranty premium from people like D**ons. complete rip off in other words unless it's an official manufacturer warranty.
 

cheapskate58

Active Member
Basically, the biggest (and most important) difference between the the SoGA and a warranty is the burden of proof. SoGA means the customer has to prove it's a manufacturing defect after six months, a warranty means the retailer/manufacturer has to prove it's not faulty.

And in many cases, you'll struggle to prove it's a manufacturing defect. Therefore, there is some value in the warranty, though I would agree the majority are very over priced.

The punter would not have to prove that it was a manufacturing defect. The case would be based around whether the product should reasonably have been expected to last longer given its type, price and usage.

Thus, a TV that is on 24 hours a day could not reasonably be expected to last as long as one used for two hours a day. So of the 24/7 one fails after 3 years, that may deemed to be appropriate given its use and you may lose any action whereas the two hour-a-day one would obviously be expected to last years longer.

A toaster would be treated differently as would a car - each case would be judged on its relative merits.

Thus the SoGA is no "guarantee" whereas an extended warranty is just that - within its own T's & C's
 

Graham27

Well-known Member
Basically, the biggest (and most important) difference between the the SoGA and a warranty is the burden of proof. SoGA means the customer has to prove it's a manufacturing defect after six months, a warranty means the retailer/manufacturer has to prove it's not faulty.
That's one of the big things, but I think there's many others too, such as the right to compensation, the allowance for wear and tear and reasonable use, etc.

The big thing in my eyes is that with a decent warranty, you'll have a working TV for that period, guaranteed. With SoGA, you might end up with compensation, part of the bill, or nowt :)
cheapskate58 said:
The punter would not have to prove that it was a manufacturing defect. The case would be based around whether the product should reasonably have been expected to last longer given its type, price and usage

Thus, a TV that is on 24 hours a day could not reasonably be expected to last as long as one used for two hours a day. So of the 24/7 one fails after 3 years, that may deemed to be appropriate given its use and you may lose any action whereas the two hour-a-day one would obviously be expected to last years longer
What you are saying about reasonable use is correct but even before you can claim along those lines, you may indeed be asked to produce some evidence to show what caused the fault, such as an engineers report or similar.

This is just to establish where the blame lies. Reason being, many products go faulty due to mis-use or user error, and are no fault of the manufacturer. A common example is smoke damage. Or toddlers :D

Another reason for asking for a report can be to cause you to a bit more hassle, and make you think it's all too much bother. I never made any of my punters prove anything, I always just checked the stuff out for myself, I just feel that's the best way to do it. Sadly, many companies can't spare the time to do this sort of thing nowadays, but that's a rant for another topic :D
 

KyleG454

Standard Member
The punter would not have to prove that it was a manufacturing defect. The case would be based around whether the product should reasonably have been expected to last longer given its type, price and usage.

Thus, a TV that is on 24 hours a day could not reasonably be expected to last as long as one used for two hours a day. So of the 24/7 one fails after 3 years, that may deemed to be appropriate given its use and you may lose any action whereas the two hour-a-day one would obviously be expected to last years longer.

A toaster would be treated differently as would a car - each case would be judged on its relative merits.

Thus the SoGA is no "guarantee" whereas an extended warranty is just that - within its own T's & C's

Sale of Goods Act Fact Sheet - BERR

Q13. What does the "reversed burden of proof" mean for the consumer?

It 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.

The SoGA does require goods to last a reasonable amount of time, if treated reasonably. But the burden of proof is on the consumer.
 

chaosrealm

Active Member
This is what my engineer sent me to pass over to Currys.........some of you might need ti hope it helps ;)

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 "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)
• 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.
• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit
• 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.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

JVC adds Filmmaker Mode to latest D-ILA projector firmware
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bowers & Wilkins launches Px8 headphone
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky set to launch its plug-and-play Sky Stream solution
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Movies Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
AV Podcast: 26th September 2022
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom