Carphone Warehouse issue - advice please?!

foggy_lad

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Are you sure that's correct, the OP is entitled to a full refund of €249 cash after having the phone for 9mts?

the phone has been faulty since january and the seller has failed to repair it properly or permenantly so it is not unreasonable at this stage to ask for the handset to be replaced or to ask for a full refund as the handset has been faulty so often and "away" for repair for almost ten weeks

foggy_lad

120_Minutes wrote: »

cpw's policy is thus:if a manufacturers fault occurs up to 28 days after the phone is purchased, and a member of cpw staff witnesses the fault in store the phone can be replaced with:

a. the same phone if you do not have all the packaging

or

b. a different phone if you do have all the packaging. (if you so wish) you can pay the difference for a dearer phone, or be refunded the difference for a cheaper one.

or

c. a full refund.

If a member of cpw staff cannot witness the fault, and the customer insists
the phone is faulty, it must be sent to be checked/repaired.

if a fault occours after 28 days however, its:

repair only, no replacement, no refund.

if a phone had to be repaired 3 times, while under warranty, after the third repair it will be replaced. if they dont have that phone anymore it is replaced with a model of similar price/spec at current prices the u600 is now the same price as a 5310 on meteor prepay...hence it being the alternative.

therin lies your "repair, refund, replace" and its in place to protect them, and us, from chancer punters taking the piss and ruining for the rest of us.

if the phone was faulty from day one, you should have returned it on day two. it kinda worked out for the op....but frankly i have no sympathy for them. their t&c's are on the back of the reciept, its up to the customer to read them (yeah yeah fine print i know...but its there)

so if you report a fault that the sales staff witness and you have all the packaging they will change it for a different phone? i just wonder why having all the packaging is so important? is it so the phone can be wiped in store and re-sold?

also carphone warehouse policy is not law and has nothing to do with a customers consumer rights which allow for repair(which must be permenant) replacement or refund. it would be illegal for the store to state at any time "repair only, no replacement, no refund.".

Sam Vimes

foggy_lad wrote: »

so if you report a fault that the sales staff witness and you have all the packaging they will change it for a different phone? i just wonder why having all the packaging is so important? is it so the phone can be wiped in store and re-sold?

ah good old foggy. No, the faulty phones are sent back to the manufacturer and they insist on having everything, most likely so they can reuse the box if nothing else. The reason you're allowed get the same phone without the packaging is they'll just give you the phone and keep everything else to send back

foggy_lad wrote: »

also carphone warehouse policy is not law and has nothing to do with a customers consumer rights which allow for repair(which must be permenant) replacement or refund. it would be illegal for the store to state at any time "repair only, no replacement, no refund.".

the law allows for repair replacement or refund at the retailers discretion so they're perfectly entitled to only offer a repair after 28 days. Replacement and refund come into it if the repair doesn't work

foggy_lad

Sam Vimes wrote: »

the law allows for repair replacement or refund at the retailers discretion so they're perfectly entitled to only offer a repair after 28 days.

they can repair replace or refund at any time but the shops policy is to refund within 28 days if the fault is evident in store. they are breaking the law telling people they will only replace or repair after 28 days or even after several attempts to repair have been made

if they can not repair or replace then a refund is the only other alternative and in the op's case when three repairs have been unsucessful a full refund should be forthcoming not some rubbish about the phone only being worth x amount now compared to when it was new.

the refund is not a refund of the phones value now but a refund of the purchase price and depreciation would only come into the equation if the op had full uninterrupted use of the handset since its purchase!

Sam Vimes

foggy_lad wrote: »

they can repair replace or refund at any time but the shops policy is to refund within 28 days if the fault is evident in store. they are breaking the law telling people they will only replace or repair after 28 days or even after several attempts to repair have been made

it's a good thing they don't tell people that then

foggy_lad wrote: »

if they can not repair or replace then a refund is the only other alternative and in the op's case when three repairs have been unsucessful a full refund should be forthcoming not some rubbish about the phone only being worth x amount now compared to when it was new.

who said anything about them not being able to replace? The op bought a phone with certain features and he's entitled to a replacement with equivalent features. A faulty phone does not entitle him to an upgrade

you really need to read these laws and stop quoting the sale of goods and services act (foggy_lad edition)

Nody

Sam Vimes wrote: »

it's a good thing they don't tell people that then


who said anything about them not being able to replace? The op bought a phone with certain features and he's entitled to a replacement with equivalent features. A faulty phone does not entitle him to an upgrade

you really need to read these laws and stop quoting the sale of goods and services act (foggy_lad edition)

But but but Citizeninformation.ie told me I had the right to money back!!!!!!111

foggy_lad

taraw87 wrote: »

Hi guys,

just need some advice on a particular issue, here's the story:

Basically I bought my boyfriend a phone from carphone warehouse for christmas last year. Samsung U600 on meteor for 249euro. Since day 1 it started giving trouble (vibrating while he was on the phone of all things!) so in January we brought it back. Carphone Warehouse said that it was their policy to have the phone sent back for repair 3 times before they would replace it. Personally, I think that's rubbish because if something is faulty you should be entitled to by law a full refund, repair or a replacement. But anyway we had it sent back because 1. you don't really think it will have to be sent back 3 times and 2. he liked the phone so, you know, he wanted it fixed.

So it came back anyway (3 weeks later I might add) and it was fine for a while and then one day, the screen went. I believe the problem was the flex cable between the two parts of the phone went which is quite common in those phones. It was sent off for repair, screen replaced, flex cable replaced, came back (another 3 weeks later) and guess what? The first phone call he made it started vibrating again. So basically straight away it was sent off for repair again.

It came back anyway, fine for a while again, then it starts turning itself off, freezing, that kind of thing so we brought it back today.

Problems I had today were basically
1. a fuss was kicked up when we did want a replacement
2. they didn't have the U600's in stock, which was fine anyway because after all that trouble he wanted a different phone. Only given the choice between 2 Nokia phones. One was the Nokia 5310 which he went for.

The problem I have is (I just want to make sure before I question and go about this further) that the phone he got today cost 159, and we paid 249 for the original samsung. Difference of 90euro. Carphone warehouse were not prepared to make up this difference as now the value of the samsung is only 89euro.

I completely understand that it wasn't going to be the same price, and after six months there is a depreciated cost, but surely, when 249 was paid for the phone, that value should be refunded as:
1. the phone was faulty from day 1.
2. the sales rep kept making the point that the phone was 9 months old. the reason it has gotten to be nine months old is because their so called policy requires it to be sent back three times. And it was gone for 3 weeks at a time. So surely this should be taken into consideration?

Long post I know, but any thoughts, or advice? I'd be really grateful

well looks like they did tell the op they were not entitled to a refund untill three repairs had been attempted then they refused to refund the purchase price as the phone has never been right.

the phone was never of merchantible quality and never fit for its intended purpose so regardless of how long the store delayed by insisting on attempted repairs the op is still entitled to a refund of the purchase price and should make an application through the small claims court which is easy to do and costs only €15

Sam Vimes

foggy_lad wrote: »

well looks like they did tell the op they were not entitled to a refund untill three repairs had been attempted then they refused to refund the purchase price as the phone has never been right.

if you look at the bit you highlighted, you'll see they said he's not entitled to a replacement until three repairs have been attempted

foggy_lad wrote: »

the phone was never of merchantible quality and never fit for its intended purpose so regardless of how long the store delayed by insisting on attempted repairs the op is still entitled to a refund of the purchase price

says who? not the sale of goods and services act anyway

foggy_lad

this is ridiculous with phone store employees and ex store employees insistiing their store policies are law or the only remedy a customer has in this type of situation.

three failed/botched repairs would/should say the phone was/is never going to be right as the op has said it has not been right since day one.

having taken almost ten months to preform their three repairs unsuccessfully you would think they might offer a replacement or refund and be gratious about it but they only offer a fraction of the phones value!

well as the warranty period froze when the 1st fault was reported and the phone has never been successfully repaired the phone has to be considered almost new for refund purposes as the value of the phone has only been diminished by the repairs performed and the time taken in attempting the repairs.

in other words the store should pay up or face paying up in the small claims court.

Sam Vimes

they did offer an equivalent replacement..........

you say they should offer him a replacement based on the value of his phone when he bought it. By that logic, replacing it with exactly the same model of phone is unacceptable since it now costs less, no?

Pythia

These threads always go the same way.

OP, what tends to work best is if you bring them to the Small Claims Court. CPW never turn up so you win by default. It costs them more to send someone than not.

You are not entitled to a phone worth the price you paid. You bought a phone with a certain spec which cost x at the time. If the phone had not broken, you would be happy with those specs now. So they should only replace your phone with one that matches this.

120_Minutes

what i'm loving about this thread is that everyones glossing over the "from day one it didnt work" who the **** doesnt bring a phone back after a day if it doesnt work???


would you keep driving your new car if the breaks were dodgy after a day??

if you kept a faulty phone, knowing it was faulty, then you havent a leg to stand on imo. its your own fault.

drunkmonkey

120_Minutes wrote: »

what i'm loving about this thread is that everyones glossing over the "from day one it didnt work" who the **** doesnt bring a phone back after a day if it doesnt work???

+1

I had a guy last week, came in giving out like crazy, phone didn't work right since I sold it to him, 6mts later he tells me.....

He still managed to clock up over 2000 minutes a month, beggers belief how he managed it with a phone that didn't work for 6mts...

If my phone stops working right it's gone back for repair within the hour....