Section 75 only helps the consumer where there has been either a breach of contract or a misrepresentation by the supplier of the goods and services. These are legal terms. But for the purpose of section 75 and put very simply:
A breach of contract is where the supplier fails to do what the contract says it must, either expressly or by implication. For example, there is a breach of contract where goods that have been paid for are not supplied at all, or are not up to standard.
A misrepresentation is an incorrect statement of fact that causes the consumer to go ahead with the contract. For example, there is misrepresentation if the supplier persuades a consumer to buy an expensive piece of software - by telling him wrongly that it will be compatible with his existing PC operating system.
We do not expect consumers to make complicated legal arguments about breach of contract or misrepresentation. Instead, we ask the consumer to tell us exactly what happened, so that we can assess for ourselves whether there are grounds for a successful claim under section 75.
In some of the cases we see, there is a question about whether the person who contracted to buy the goods is the sameperson who was provided with the credit.
This is important because of the connection between the consumer, lender and supplier that is necessary for section 75 to apply. Where this question arises, we consider this point first, taking into account the facts in the case - and then we go on to look further into the complaint, if we decide that the transaction is covered by section 75.
The complaints we see show that there are frequent misunderstandings by consumers and businesses about how section 75 works. Here are some of the most common misunderstandings we see:
Section 75 gives an automatic entitlement to a refund, if credit was used to fund the purchase.
No. There is no automatic entitlement to a refund under section 75. Instead, the consumer has the same claim against the lender that they would have against the supplier of the goods, if there were a misrepresentation or a breach of contract by the supplier.
You have to take the supplier to court before you can claim against the lender under section 75.
No. The consumer does not have to take the supplier to court before making a claim against the lender under section 75. In most of the cases we see, the consumer will have complained initially to the supplier - because this is usually the quickest way to get things put right. But the law does not require the consumer to pursue the supplier first, for section 75 to apply.
All purchases made with plastic cards are covered by section 75.
No. Section 75 only covers transactions made using consumer credit. So only transactions made with credit cards (including most store cards) are covered. Transactions made using other types of plastic cards - like charge cards or debit cards - are notcovered by section 75.
Section 75 gives you a "cooling-off" period.
No. By itself, section 75 does not give any "cooling-off" period to the consumer. So, for example, section 75 would not allow a consumer to cancel a transaction following a change of heart about a purchase.
You can claim under section 75 if you do not get value for money.
No. Section 75 gives the consumer a right to claim against the lender in specific circumstances - where there was a misrepresentation or a breach of contract by the supplier. But there is no claim simply because, for example, you find you could have bought the same goods at a better price somewhere else - or if, on reflection, you feel the purchase was not worth the money.
If you bring a claim under section 75, the most you can get back from the lender is the amount of the credit.
No. Where section 75 applies, it gives the consumer exactly the same claim against the lender as they would have against the supplier of the goods or services, if there were a misrepresentation or a breach of contract by that supplier. This might be more than, or less than, the amount of the credit transaction - depending on what happened.
Thank you for your enquiry dated 6th January to the Citizens Advice consumer service. Your reference number is *****. Please accept our apology in the delay in responding to your enquiry.
We understand that you purchased a TV from a Trader on the 25th July 2016. You have stated that you feel that the goods are not as described as per the advert on their website.
Your rights and obligations
This purchase is governed by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which states that goods purchased must match the description supplied pre-contract, such as on the packaging, advert, or description for example. This could also be as per the sample shown, or the model shown.
You can argue for a repair or replacement, any repairs that are carried out should be free and replacement should be on a like for like basis, both of these should be done within a reasonable time and without causing yourself any significant inconvenience. You as the consumer do only have to allow for one repair or replacement, and the trader may choose the most cost effective remedy of doing so. If the Trader cannot repair, or replace the item you would then be able to exercise the next tier of your remedies which would give you two options to be able to keep the goods and seek a partial refund, or to exercise the final reject of the goods where you would return them to the trader for an appropriate refund. As it is more than 6 months since purchase, this would take into account any usage.
Goods are covered for up to 6 years under the limitations act.
If you wish to request this remedy the burden of proof would be upon yourself to prove to the trader that they are in breach. In this circumstance this could be done by measuring the item against the measurements specified on the packaging, or referring to the advert, or description for example.
You would be within your rights to claim any standard delivery costs in relation to returning the item, or for any costs as per the Trader’s terms and conditions and/or how they have instructed you to return the item.
Your next steps
We would suggest you to put your complaint in writing which can be seen as a more formal approach to the trader. The Citizen Advice website has template letters available that you may find useful and give yourself guidance. What we would suggest is if you decide to send a letter, we advise recorded delivery and keep a copy for yourself, this starts the paper trail between yourself and the trader; however it is also proof of postage.
Please be aware that if the product is on finance, you will need to pursue the finance company rather than the trader for any remedy, as this is whom your contract in law is with.
Additionally, or if you have already followed the above steps, we would advise you to see if the trader has a complaints procedure and is part of an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme, this is abbreviated to ‘ADR’. What these schemes do is act as a mediator between two parties to help come to a resolution sooner than going to court.
There is a link to our website here, which details the ADR process in greater detail: Alternative Dispute Resolution.
If you are unable to get your situation resolved following the above steps, you would then need to pursue the matter through the small claims court. You can make a claim via their website here Small Claims Court. Please be aware however, you will need to have exhausted all other steps first before issuing any claim as a Judge will ask you to demonstrate what practical steps you have taken to resolve the situation with the Trader first.
What we’ll do
We will notify Trading Standards, whilst this does not help to resolve your specific issue it does give Trading Standards vital intelligence of how the trader is operating their business. If Trading Standards require any further information, they will be in touch.
If you require any further advice or information about this case, please do not hesitate to contact the Citizens Advice consumer service by return email or on 03454 04 05 06, quoting, your reference number.
Good afternoon Mr K******, I am contacting in response to your communication received to the CEO of Samsung UK. I am sorry to learn of your disappointment following your communication with our customer support team.
With regard to the Smart Things dongle, the decision was made for this to not be released, and I recognise that this has caused disappointment for which I offer my apologies. What I can do is provide a SmartThings Hub to you without charge as a gesture of goodwill. Please let me know if you would like to receive this and I can make the arrangements for you.
Thank you for contacting us with your concerns.
If I accept this it won’t ruin any chance with Currys refund?
That is all we needed because they have admitted misrepresentation. I suggest this goes to Curry's as proof for everyone who has received a dumb reply from Curry's. This is gold it's from samsung UK head office and they are not denying that they advertised the Smart Connect. Even more importantly they are offering compensation. This is the proof for court and Section 75 and if you bought on credit to get a fukk refund.
I think though if you except this it would be seen as a solution and would stop your claim in respect to the Smart Connect and I am sure that would be a condition of receiving what I think is a poor bribe to stop you action.
I would email Curry's with this reply telling them that Samsung UK have admitted to misrepresentation, and you want a full refund as per the Oct 2015 Eurpeon Consumer regs.
Samsung UK have also emailed me personally admitting to misrepresentation and the reason why I waited so long as Samsung promised it would be out by the end of 2017 but then admitted this would not be the case finally from their statement below.
"Hi ******, I have spoken with the Head Office and located the team that deal with the Tech talk section, so please accept my apologies for the previous reply. As I have advised you previously the link you provided does not state that your specific television has the Smart Things included, again the article was printed in March 2016 and you didn't purchase the product until November 2016. The television has not been mis-sold. Please accept my apologies that we are unable to assist with your request on this occasion."
I think this is a first step and a good proof that I have been mis-sold. I need to be patient but I think this can be useful. This is a confirmation from them that this is their website.
I find it actually strengthens your case when they admit the advert was online months before you bought your set.
Bringing the smart home to the masses through the telly
Though it is becoming more established, smart home tech remains relatively niche. It’s still the kind of thing purchased by young, tech-savvy folk rather than your mum and dad.
However, Samsung hopes to bring the smart home to a much wider audience by building SmartThings into their new Smart TVs. And, because TVs are mass market it makes this technology easier to access for everyone.
How to use SmartThings on your TV
Samsung’s 2016 SUHD TVs have a built-in SmartThings hub, which is normally bought separately.
Your new TV will come with the SmartThings Extend, a small USB-like dongle that plugs into your TV. Once you’ve done this, switch on your TV and connect to Wi-Fi.
On the TV’s hub screen, you’ll see the SmartThings app alongside things like Netflix, YouTube and regular channels.
Highlight the app, and then select the option you want from the boxes that appear above. It’s really that easy to use.
So just copy and ask how they can not be advertising a free Smart Connect Dongle.
It looks like they are going to use the same tactics with every claim, but that does not matter because they know they do not have a defence if it goes to court.
"We understand from your email you purchased a TV and was advertised that is comes with a USB dongle on a website which belongs to the trader. You purchased one smart thing device and you found it with your TV because the USB dongle wasn't provided and you would like advice in regards to this.
Your rights and obligations:
Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, all goods supplied by a trader to a consumer should match any description upon which you have relied to make your purchase.
You may be able to seek redress from the trader if the goods do not match their description.
You could look to request a repair or replacement in the first instance if that’s possible. Any repair or replacement should match the initial description you relied upon, should be free of charge, within reasonable time and not cause significant inconvenience.
If a repair or replacement is impossible, cannot be done free of charge, within a reasonable time or would cause significant inconvenience you could then request to either exercise your final right to reject the goods for a refund or, a price reduction on what you’ve paid for the goods.
The trader may deduct for usage taking into account the amount of time you’ve had possession of the goods. Any refund should be provided within 14 days of the refund being agreed and via the same payment method.
The burden of proof is on the trader; therefore they would need to prove that the goods match any description of which you relied on.
You may be able to claim consequential losses; these would typically be any losses you have suffered as a direct result of the trader supplying faulty goods.
You would need to provide evidence of any losses you have incurred and any losses would need to be kept as low as possible.
As you’ve paid by debit card, we would suggest contacting your bank to see if they offer a chargeback scheme. Chargeback is not a legal requirement; it’s voluntary and will be bound by its own terms and conditions. This could be an alternative way of seeking redress.
Your next steps:
We would suggest that you contact the trader and request a copy of their formal complaints procedure and follow this. If the trader does not have a complaints procedure, we recommend you send a letter outlining the reasons for your complaint.
We would suggest setting a reasonable deadline for a response, keeping a copy of any correspondence for your records and sending any letters by recorded delivery; that way the mail will be tracked and signed for.
As part of your complaint we would recommend you ask the trader if they are a member of an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme (ADR) or, if they’re not, would they be willing to use a non-membership based scheme.
ADR schemes are independent bodies that offer services such as arbitration or mediation if your complaint is still unresolved after following the trader’s complaints process.
What we'll do:
We will refer the information you have provided to Trading standards, there is no commitment for them to contact you directly, Trading Standards will only contact you if they deem it necessary. Whilst this does not help you resolve your dispute, it gives Trading Standards vital intelligence on how a trader is conducting their business."