READERS' FORUM:Have your say
A reader, Oliver, writes about a friend who bought a 40-inch LCD in Tesco in Clonmel in December 2008. “It was the family Christmas present and probably the most expensive item in the store when it was purchased for over €800.”
Last week, the LCD panel started losing picture, so Oliver’s friend brought it back to Tesco, where the manager agreed that the unit had a technical fault. The manager offered to send it for repair but said that our reader’s friend would have to pay for the repair as the unit was now out of warranty.
“This could amount to several hundred euro. They keep referring to the one-year manufacturer’s warranty which starts from date of purchase. He has provided receipted proof of purchase to the store,” writes Oliver.
He says his understanding is that an electrical product is covered by a two-year Retail warranty as laid down by the European Union Directive 1999/44/EC, but “the shop keeps stating that their company policy is only to offer a one-year warranty from date of purchase and that my friend should contact Sanyo directly.”
Oliver contacted Sanyo Ireland “who again re-iterated that there is only one-year manufacturer’s warranty on the product”.
The law is very clear in cases such as this. While Ireland is exempt from the European Union Directive 1999/44/EC mentioned by our reader, consumers have full protection under the Sale of Goods Act.
The act states very clearly that products must be fit for purpose, of merchantable quality and as described for a reasonable amount of time after purchase – and by any definition, it is reasonable to assume that a TV that costs more than €800 will last for more than two years. If it doesn’t, then the consumer is entitled to a repair, a replacement or a refund. The manufacturer’s warranty is entirely irrelevant in cases such as this.
Another point worth making is that the person’s contract is with Tesco and no one else. We contacted the National Consumer Agency, which confirmed that our reader’s friend was covered under the Sale of Goods Act. We were told that the first course of action would be to talk to the management in Tesco. If the company refuses to alter its stance, then our reader was advised to put the complaint in writing and send it via registered mail. If no satisfactory response was forthcoming, the next step is the Small Claims Court.
We decided to try a shortcut and contacted the store ourselves.
In a statement, the company said it aimed to provide “the best possible service to our customers. In the event of a customer complaint that a product has become faulty outside its warranty period, it is our policy to comply fully with the provisions of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Acts. In these circumstances, we will forward the product on behalf of the customer to the manufacturer for further inspection. On receipt of the manufacturer’s report, each case is then reviewed on its merits. We would be happy to investigate this matter further if we had more specific information.”
Ryanair track down the missing tenner
Nuala O’Hagan got in touch in relation to refunds for cancelled flights due to the ash problem a few weeks ago. “I have a very straightforward case, but have hit a hiccup with Ryanair at the first step. While I’ll pursue this as much as I can, I have a sinking feeling it could be a long battle and might be something to highlight to readers.”
She booked return flights to London for Monday, April 19th with Ryanair but on Friday, April 16th the flight, along with hundreds of others, was cancelled. “On Sunday, April 18th I applied for a refund on the Ryanair website.” In early May she got an email acknowledging her application and a day later another email saying that the refund had been processed. “So far, so good – except (you’ve guessed it) the refund amount was lower than the amount I’d paid for the flight by €10.
“I have to say I wasn’t really surprised – I’d have been more surprised if it had all gone smoothly – and will now start the process of querying this with Ryanair via the fax number (!) they issued in the email (apparently the only form of contact allowed). I’m not confident that I’ll get a speedy response. I really doubt it’s a clerical error and suspect that the €10 being withheld is the administration fee, or is a new refund administration fee, or some such Ryanair concoction. Given that the cancellation was completely beyond my control, I can’t see any justification for withholding any part of the ticket price.”
We contacted Ryanair and its head of communications, Stephen McNamara, provided us with the following statement. “Ms O’Hagan applied for a refund on April 18th. It was processed by one of our new Refund Agents on May 5th, who made a mistake by not refunding the entire amount. This error was identified at close of business on May 5th, and the balance of €10 was immediately refunded to Ms O’Hagan the following day (6th).
“A letter of apology for the error was also issued to her. Not alone did Ms O’Hagan receive her full refund, but also two speedy responses. Prompt and efficient customer service from Ryanair – as always!”
