Open search

KS Owners refund


Thanks Paul.


I've replied with this which I think covers the points you suggest...


Hi xxxxx,


Thank you for your reply but I think that you have misunderstood the reason for my contact.


To be absolutely clear, I am not claiming on my guarantee, I am claiming because I was mis sold the television.


Please revisit my original email but in summary…


  • Your advertising showed the TV as being able to be operated as a SmartThings hub with the addition of a SmartThings extend USB dongle to be supplied later in 2016.
  • This was an integral function of the TV and formed part of my buying decision
  • This HARDWARE was never delivered and Samsung have now stated that it never will be delivered
  • This is NOT a software issue, it is a non-delivery of HARDWARE issue
  • The Consumer Rights Act 2015 clearly states that goods supplied must " Be as described”. In this case the TV was not as you described in your advertising.


I have been mis sold the TV by yourselves and therefore am within my rights to request a full refund under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.


As stated previously, I would be happy to accept store credit the full value of the TV rather than a cash refund as I would be happy to swap my TV for another from one of your stores


I hope that I am able to conclude this matter with yourselves but I recognise that I could start section 75 proceedings with my credit card company for breach of contract due to the misrepresentation of your product which section 75 covers. I am aware that other customers who have purchased this TV have been successful going down this route but as I said, I would rather come to a conclusion directly with yourselves.


Please would you advise when I might expect this refund as soon as possible




Great reply. Best of luck. I think JL are being a little more reasonable and able to be dealt with than Curr'y's. I offered in a telephone conversation to add money to the refund/store credit to get a model which would perform as originally described for the KS. No deal. On a different note I now have my KS7500 back from Knowhow (after 30 days). Great customer service? I think not.


JL were no more reasonable with me than Currys appear to have been with others and were steadfast in their position. As Ive detailed in a previous post. 

I'd just get to a final decision from them then escalate through whatever means suits you rather than waste any more of your time. My experience with Tesco Credit card through section 75 was a world away from my experience with JL and resulted in a full refund as previously commented. 


My mediation appointment has been cancelled due to illness of one of the mediators. They are trying to find a new date. Possibly the 28th. 

Curry's kicking the can down the road?
Here is their latest and my response
ase reference: CC3833006

Thank you for your recent email, dated 20th November 2018.

I note your disappointment with our response regarding your Samsung TV and the fact that support for the hub has been withdrawn by the manufacturer.

Having received your details as requested we have been able to locate the purchase and been able to review the matter. I must advise, that at the time of purchase the TV sold was fit for purpose and in adherence with the intention of being compatible with a service or product that was created by the manufacturer, and marketed as such at the time. As with all technology, as time advances so does technology around it, which has resulted in the withdrawal of the supported devices in certain markets. As we rely on manufacturer's specifications at the time of introduction, there would have been no way to anticipate that the products and support would be withdrawn by Samsung. As this is down to the manufacturer, not the retailer we would not be liable for any recourse due to the products being correctly advertised before withdrawal.

In respect of likely resolution I further note that this has been discussed, and subsequently rejected by yourself. As this is something that Samsung have taken upon themselves by remit of offering a solution to all affected customers, we are unable to comment on the remedial action taken by other retailers, as the case you presented may be prior to this resolution being offered by Samsung at the time the case was brought about.

Although this response may not be the outcome you were looking for, I trust that this response clearly explains our position on this matter.

Kind regards,

Team Knowhow
Thank you for your latest email. It is unfortunate that you have chosen to once again misinterpret Consumer Law and especially the 2015 Consumer Rights Act. I do not know who has instructed you to to take this misinterpretation but that is a matter for you to take up with them.
1) The Law is quite clear that goods be as described and the fact that both you and Samsung have offered "solution" is tantamount to admitting that the Product is NOT as described and would be sufficient proof to stand up in court to indicate that you have admitted to breaching the above Act and misleading me the consumer.
2) The fact that you repeated this misinformation on your website is for you to take up with Samsung and seek whatever redress you desire form them. However I relied on the information on your website and therefore it falls to you the retailer to make ammends.
3) I am well aware that technology advances and I would not seek redress if a laptop that I bought today with similar specs as one I bought 2yrs ago had a feature that the older one had not, provided it had not been advertised at the time of purchase, which this TV was.
4) I sympathise with you that you have been misled by Samsung but surely that is for you to address with Samsung by reversing my contract with you, taking back the TV and in turn being reimbursed by Samsung as I know other retailers have. NB My contract is with you not Samsung.
5) The so called solution does not in any way make the TV perform the functions (integral) as advertised. It merely integrates the TV onto the Smart Things app on a Smart phone and does not "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. " So perhaps you could explain how this is any way a solution.
6) In any case this is now out of my hands as I have instigated a Section 75 with Santander cards but please be assured that I will pass your latest response through to them indicating your acknowledgement of misrepresentation
7) Please note that I have offered a compromise by paying the difference between the amount that I paid for my KS7500 at the time and a TV of similar specs which you are currently retailing which will perform as this was advertised.
Once again I regret the stance that you have taken as this matter could so easily have been resolved by your adherance to the Act
PS With regard to your assumption that the ADR case quoted was BEFORE Samsung's offered "solution" let me also dispell that particular myht. Samsung's solution was offered in Jan 2018, whereas the Case was referred to ADR on 5 June 2018.

Update of my Barclaycard Section 75: Four x calls this week by me, being fobbed off, usual delaying tactics etc etc. Fortunately I’ve resisted enough to get it escalated to “Level 2”. If no resolution there then they write to you saying they have reached a final position, then off to the Financial Ombudsman. Takes 15 days apparently before they respond.


Frustrating, but as has been said, it’s a process/game and you have to go through it - defeating them at each stage thru the power of logic! 


Barclaycard upheld my Section 75 - I thought i would let you know.


I had to push for it, they originally agreed with the miss-selling but would only give me 4/6ths the price of the TV to account for usage. I disagreed and asked for it to be escalated. When it got to their complaints team, they upheld the section 75, giving me a choice of full refund or half the cost and keep the TV.

Black Belt 

@rosscouk wrote:

Barclaycard upheld my Section 75 - I thought i would let you know.


I had to push for it, they originally agreed with the miss-selling but would only give me 4/6ths the price of the TV to account for usage. I disagreed and asked for it to be escalated. When it got to their complaints team, they upheld the section 75, giving me a choice of full refund or half the cost and keep the TV.

Great stuff, can you please put in to the results thread,


and which retailer was it with.




My retailer PowerDirect are not accepting liability and no longer have the actual advert to prove the case, raised this with ADR. 


In in the mean time, I have also taken this to Samsung CEO office. What’s interesting is they offered me the Smart Thing Hub, which I declined and requested an exchange or full refund. The response back to that was as follows:


In this regard we are unable to offer an exchange or refund as requested. Any escalations pertaining to the sale of the product should be referred to your retailer, as seller, as opposed Samsung as the manufacturer, our offer for affected customers is to provide a free of charge Smart Things Extend which is available through the channels previously detailed.

We are sorry that we cannot provide a resolution more in line with your request but if you do re-consider and wish to accept the Smart Things Extend do please contact our Smart Things Team to have this request supported.”


As you can see, they have offered me the Smart Thing Extend twice by mistake. Would you guys think that is blantent direct misrepresentation and should now offer the exchange or full refund? 


Top Liked Authors