# Lidl TV (Toshiba) faulty after 2 years



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

I purchased a Toshiba TV in Lidl (Dec 2014), assuming that they provided a 3 year warranty. Two years later the picture went blank. I contacted my local Lidl store with the problem and was advised that Lidl only provide a one year warranty on branded goods and Toshiba give a two year warranty. After numerous emails and calls to Lidl Customer Service staff and a supervisor, I was told that Toshiba provided a five year warranty if I had completed the form that came with the TV (which I didn't keep so not sure if it even existed). I'm tempted to let it go but I'm wondering if Irelands Sale of Goods Act would help pursuing to the Small Claims Court? Surely a branded TV should last for more than two years - regardless of warranties/ form filling etc.
Thanks for any advice in advance.


----------



## Cervelo (13 Apr 2017)

Yes, the Sales of goods act is designed exactly for the problem you are having, the life span of a TV and most electrial products is at least 5 years iirc.


----------



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

I've emailed Lidl on several occasions over the last month requesting that they provide written confirmation of their failure to comply with the sale of goods act but they only quote warranties over the phone and nothing in writing. I'm just wondering if I'm wasting my time and energy in pursuing this?


----------



## Leo (13 Apr 2017)

Warranties are always an addition to your statutory entitlements, they cannot replace or negate them. Have a read of this advice from the Consumer Protection Commission.


----------



## alexandra123 (13 Apr 2017)

Similar experience happened to my father. 
He bought a stove in a shop
After 3 years the stove was faulty. 
The owner of the shop said that he only acted as an agent and he needed to sort it out with the supplier. 
Neither the agent or the supplier were willing to resolve the matter. 
He was told that because he did not fill out the warranty that they would not assist in helping rectify the situation. He never got a warranty and was never told to fill it out.

Long story short - he went to court a few weeks ago and got the full amount back + expenses. Although they are appealing - they are offering him a new stove to the value + some compensation towards refit costs. 

He had to bring the agent to court not the supplier.


----------



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

Thanks Leo and * for the replies. *I'm just a disgruntled customer now. I reckon I have a case for a repair, replacement or a refund and I would be satisfied if any was offered. All my calls to Lidl were answered with the warranty card. Surely warranties are included - in addition to consumer rights - but can't supercede them. I realise that depreciation will be a factor in the outcome but is it worthwhile to pursue the Small Claims/ District Court route?


----------



## mathepac (13 Apr 2017)

Yes and it is only by using the remedies our consumer laws provide us with will we ever convince retailers once and for all of their obligations to us. 

I have faced down Currys PC World twice and won. Once they sold me a used (as shop demo) computer as new. The salesman had registered the device with the manufacturer and I was denied the opportunity to register for a manufacturer's cash-back offer and a manufacturer's warranty. This was the last of their stock of that spec so I got the next spec up for the lower price.

A monitor failed within 12 months and I got the next size/spec up as a direct replacement by only paying the difference in price.

Have your receipts, know your rights and ask to escalate the problem to the next level up, in the shop if possible, not on the phone. Repeat the mantra, "My legal rights under EU law as an Irish consumer are ...".


----------



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

I have receipts and I've escalated the problem from customer care to another in a supervisory role. The supervisor said that I should have completed a form that came with the TV, which would have extended the warranty to five years.


----------



## Leo (13 Apr 2017)

Good advice there, and the more successful stories we can document here the better future consumers can be advised on how to proceed.


----------



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

Do you recommend that I take a SCC case Leo?


----------



## mathepac (13 Apr 2017)

Cowpat said:


> The supervisor said that I should have completed a form that came with the TV, which would have extended the warranty to five years.


Shudda, wudda, cudda. 

The retailer's obligations to you as a consumer are enshrined in Irish case law and simply by buying the item and having a receipt for it, you have a contract with the retailer. That's it, you need not jump through any additional hoops they offer or specify.

If you voluntarily register for warranties with the manufacturer or part-take in quizzes or web-site surveys for "extra stuff", then these are yours as well as your basic consumer rights which guarantee that:


the item is as described
of merchantable quality and is
fit for purpose.

You do not need to say anything at the point of purchase, sign anything or agree to anything over and above what is needed to complete  your transaction as a consumer.

Anything the retailer attempts to do to diminish or reduce your consumer rights is illegal and may render them liable to prosecution.


----------



## Cowpat (13 Apr 2017)

Thanks mathpac for that helpful information.
So it looks like I'll have to take a Small Clams suit then.. unless anyone has a less stressful solution


----------



## Leo (14 Apr 2017)

If you have exhausted every avenue with the retailer, then, yes, SCC is the way to go. Perhaps one last call explaining you are filling in the SCC application might get them to budge.


----------



## Cowpat (10 Jul 2017)

Cowpat said:


> I purchased a Toshiba TV in Lidl (Dec 2014), assuming that they provided a 3 year warranty.


After two years and three months the TV failed to work and Lidl refused a refund, replacement or a repair so I filed a SSC case. The latest update is that Lidl were notified of the claim by the District Court and responded in writing to say that "a proper and sufficient warranty applied from the date of purchase and has since expired. We cannot be held responsible for items sold in store outside of this period."
The District Court mailed me the letter and requested a response with comments in writing. I assume that I just need to confirm that I intend to pursue with the claim?
Thanks


----------



## Leo (10 Jul 2017)

Warranties are in addition to your statutory rights, and can not replace or extinguish those rights.

From the Sale & Supply of Good Act.: 



> (3) Goods are of merchantable quality if they are as fit for the purpose or purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly bought and as durable as it is reasonable to expect having regard to any description applied to them, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances, and any reference in this Act to unmerchantable goods shall be construed accordingly.



You will need to argue that ~2 years life expectancy is unacceptable for that particular TV.


----------



## Cowpat (10 Jul 2017)

Thanks for the reply Leo. I would assume that since Lidl informed me by phone that I had not completed a warranty card at the time of purchase (which would have extended the manufacturer warranty to five years) that they agree that a two year warranty is not sufficient. I still fail to see why a customer has to complete any document to extend a warranty.


----------



## Leo (10 Jul 2017)

Offering these extended warranties is a means of collecting customer data that they can then use for marketing purposes.


----------



## Cowpat (11 Jul 2017)

Thanks for the great info & guidance so far but I'm trying to provide a response to the SCC but my letter becomes more long-winded as I get bogged down in detail. I do realise that it's a big ask - but does anyone with experience in this area have a rough idea of how to respond to Lidl Legal & Compliance team with facts that are relevant in a SCC - rather than my ramblings and quoting the sale of good acts 1980... I honestly believe that I have a legitimate case that a branded electrical item should last more than 2.3 years.


----------



## Jazz01 (11 Jul 2017)

Cowpat - Have a look at the [broken link removed] for guidance in the letter, they have templates for such, but as you are responding to the SCC, just stick to the facts.
- When the product was purchased
- Where it was purchased
- When the issue arose
- Steps you took with lidl (you had contract with the store)
--- Detail the date & time of the calls / person you talked to / what was discussed
- Steps you took with manufacturer
--- Detail the date & time of the calls / person you talked to / what was discussed

Then you state that such an electrical item life expectancy must be greater than ~2 years, and do go ahead and quote the sale of goods act etc. The letter, I would expect will be long, but no issue with that - main thing is to stick with the details and not to get "personal" within the letter. 

If you still feel there is too much detail in relation to the "steps you took to get it resolved", etc,  you can just reference "Appendix 1 - Steps taken with lidl / manufacturer" and have all that detail at the end of the letter, so your main letter isn't bogged down with such.
I'll have a look for a letter when I get home this evening, that I handed into a large electrical store in relation to an issue I had a few years ago - didn't go as far as SCC, but might be helpful anyway.


----------



## Cowpat (26 Jul 2017)

Just as a final update. The court Registrar phoned last week to inform me that Lidl were willing to settle for €x. I contested the amount. Lidl replied and increased the offer. I was advised that the court case would require taking a day off work and since it was a fairly minor case it probably wouldn't be first to be heard. I accepted the second offer. The online case status is now updated to 'Settled by Registrar'. The Lidl vouchers arrived by registered post today. 
Thanks to the helpful posters on AAM.


----------



## Leo (26 Jul 2017)

Well done Cowpat, and thanks for reporting back.


----------



## SparkRite (26 Jul 2017)

Thanks for the update @Cowpat , but am I correct in thinking that you got Lidl vouchers as opposed to cash, as you say in finishing, 


Cowpat said:


> The Lidl vouchers arrived by registered post today.



Also while you appear that you do not wish to divulge how much you settled for will you tell us the % of the price paid for the TV, please?


----------



## mathepac (26 Jul 2017)

I hope you're happy with the outcome, personally I would not be. LIDL vouchers do not cost LIDL their face value, merely the cost-price of the goods you redeem them against. You didn't pay for the TV with LIDL vouchers but with hard-earned money on which you paid tax, USC, PRSI etc. The Registrar has allowed LIDL to settle "in kind" rather than with a cash refund. I'd also have a problem with being restricted to spending "the settlement" with the retailer I'd had the dispute with. Just my 2d.


----------



## Jazz01 (26 Jul 2017)

Well done ... am surprised that Lidl they went that far though, but well done for sticking it out...


----------



## SirMille (26 Jul 2017)

Hmmmm, could be my pensioners adled mind, but I thought I heard the European Union out a five year warranty on items such as TVs. UK thing perhaps.


----------



## mathepac (27 Jul 2017)

No an Irish thing, 6 years for consumer durables as established by Irish case law, a better deal than current EU consumer protection and waaaay better than "UK thing".


----------

