Search Complaints
Search claims by the following criteria
Sort searching results by:
| COMPANY NAME | DATE OF CLAIM | NUMBER OF COMMENTS |
Found: 1
| ID | Company | Claim Title | Added | Claims | Comments | Details | |||
| 151 | Comet [Hull] | Sale of Goods Act - "out of pocket expenses" » | 23/11/2009 | Total claims: 1 | Comments: 0 | ||||
Chest Freezer, bought 30/07/07, showed RED warning light mid Oct. 2009. Intial response from service dept. Comet: out of warranty. Quoted Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) in writing, handed letter into London Romford branch (where freezer was bought and emailed copy as attchment to Comet HQ in Hull. - Was advised by Comet to book emgineer call out, had to pay £ 29.36 when booking appointment, i.e. in advance. - Engineer attended, inspected and declared freezer BER = beyond exconomical repair. Comet offered £ 120.00 = abt 2/3rd of sales price but categorically refuses to refund £ 29.36. Latest answer from Comet: "... wea re not obliged to refund your inspection fee under this legislation, as we have no evidence to suggest that the cause of the fault was due to a manufacturing defect." I am persuing a principal here: Comet intially and still trying very hard to mislead the genreal public by initially rejecting the claim alltogether (out of 1 year warranty), only reacting (positivly) with part refund under 6 year rule but still trying to reject claim for "out of pocket expenses" suffered due to manufactuing fault. Would like to "throw at them" case law, i.e. judgements as near as possible to above scenario. Thank you for your help. Lutz Friedhoff | |||||||||
