The more expert explanation (I am not a lawyer) is here in the Law Gazette.
The relatively short relevant bit is stated as:
"The restricted costs regime which operates on the small claims track is the main reason that, save for road traffic claims, lawyers are rarely involved in its cases. The winner must bear his own legal costs unless he can satisfy the district judge that the loser has behaved unreasonably (not easy, although a failure to turn up or a litany of barefaced lies may be enough), and even then he may only be awarded a summarily assessed proportion of them.
All the winner will generally be able to collect are the fixed costs on commencement, court fees, travelling expenses for the winner and his witnesses, loss of earnings for the winner and his witnesses capped at £90 per day each and expert fees, the cap for which rose from £200 to £750 from 1 April (it being arguable that this would allow a jointly instructed single expert’s report for up to £1,500 with each of two parties being required to pay the expert £750 when permission is granted and the losing party being ordered to pay the winner £750 in respect of his outlay)."
Thanks, information is always good, and still worth while recording the time spent dealing with this.
In my small claims case Currys have already denied receiving my email, so I'd always suggest writing via Royal Mail Signed For (i.e. recorded delivery) as a more foolproof way of ensuring your correspondance has been received. There is no reliably way of proving an email has been received (never mind read..) and if your case goes to court, you'll need reliable proof that you've gone through all means necessary to resolve the matter out of court first.
I always think e-mail is best as they can not deny not receiving.
Just phoned up curry's creation finance and mentioned my problem with curry's and the woman on the phone didn't know what a section 75 was. . So anyway she is putting forward a complaint to curry's to try and push them,as I explained there only offering me a hub which is totally different to the smart things extend dongle..
So let's see what happens may take upto 8 weeks apparently
Latest email I sent to curry's
Thank you for your response although I am not satisfied with your proposed solution for the reason below…
The Samsung Hub that is suggested as a remedy absolutely does not allow the functionality that the TV was advertised as having on your own website here… http://techtalk.currys.co.uk/tv-gaming/tv/how-to-control-your-home-from-your-smart-tv/
The particular part that I refer to is…
Picture the scene: you’re sat on the sofa in front of the TV and the remote in your hand controls not only what you’re watching, but also other devices around your home.
From your TV remote you can check on your sleeping baby, or see who’s at the front door. You can set the mood for a movie, or switch off your lights and TV at the same time.
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.
The Samsung hub will not allow control of smart things from the TV as advertised as it only allows the TV to be a ‘Thing’. The SmartThings Hub would need to be controlled from a mobile or tablet. It is also important to know that control over the TV is limited, for instance it is not possible to switch the TV ON from standby.
This is clearly not the same functionality offered in your advertisement and that which is still available on your website as detailed above
Whilst I understand you may have used information provided by the manufacturer (Samsung), it is your duty to ensure that the information you provide to the consumer is accurate, as this information was used as a basis by me for entering the contract of sale with you and in my decision to purchase this particular TV from yourselves.
As this feature was announced as a function native to the TV and then subsequently dropped, this is now something that the TV will never be able to achieve despite it being advertised as being able to do so. The consumer rights act 2015 protects against this under "As described", defined as… The goods supplied must match any description given to you, or any models or samples shown to you at the time of purchase.
As the TV no longer matches the advertised features, and still shown on your website, this is in breach of this section of the sale of goods act, under the Consumer Rights Act.
You state that yourselves and Samsung acknowledge my situation, and I hope that means you acknowledge that you mis-represented the TV in your advertising?
As I have been mis-sold this TV, I have a right to a full refund of the original purchase price and that is what I require please.
As previously stated, I would accept this in the form of a refund or an exchange rather than cash as currently I remain loyal to curry's and would wish to purchase my next TV from yourselves.
Regards Mr ..... .......
Apologies I haven’t followed up with you all since Curry’s agreed to refund me.
Truth is I am still waiting for the full refund, Curry’s made numerous mistakes ranging from first telling me they were handling the full refund to then telling me that Creation were actually partially refunding me.
Then they didn’t know how to process the refund or ‘cancel it off’ so that Creation could refund me so we’re now on day 21 since the TV was returned. All through fault of Curry’s.
Currys have compensated me £50 so far for the mistakes and time without a television but I’ll be requesting more.
It’s very obvious to me they don’t do this often if at all.
So, yeah. I haven’t been ‘sworn to silence’ haha I’ve just been very busy and also STILL waiting for the full refund. Nightmare.
As as it stands I have received a partial refund from Curry’s and am awaiting around 70% of the total from Creation which SHOULD hopefully be completed this week but I am not holding my breath.