Support

Open search

iPlayer HLG/UHD HDR on Samsung’s J and K Series TVs

AntS Moderator
Moderator

paul1277 wrote: 

@AntS can you comfirm that the KS 2016 sets will be able to recieve the olympics HLG 4k from the broadcast on bbc (not Ipayer) as shown in the link. You did post that the HLG update for the 2016 sets supports broadcast which is what this will be. It's only a few weeks off.

Thanks

Paul


I can confirm that with the latest firmware installed, KS 2016 sets are able to receive HLG on Broadcast services. Can't confirm if the BBC are indeed broadcasting the Olympics in HLG or how they'd deliver it though.


Prince_Community_Sig03.jpg

 Say "Hello!" to the Community in The Introduce Yourself Thread.


Explorer

I havent got my original email as went via their email server. However, please find string after that. Sorry for the length. In all the responses they never once dealt with my query re the Smart Hub. Next step is to write to the Chief Exec enclosing this string. I am very unimpressed by their level of customer service saying they would not reply to any further contact. 

 

CASE-*****
17 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for getting in touch about the Samsung K9000 Television, you purchased from us last year.
 
You’ve raised a lot of points and I’d really like the opportunity to investigate this further with our Buying Office and Samsung directly. This will allow me to provide you with a comprehensive response.
 
I’d appreciate if you could allow me some time to look into this and I’ll be in touch once I’ve heard back from our Buying Office.
 
In the meantime if I can be of any assistance please do contact me.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****
Customer Relations Case Manager
John Lewis

Good afternoon Hayley,

 

Many thanks for the update. Samsung name is frankly mud for all the purchasers of their K series of TV with a significant number of people now contacting either their retailer, Samsung directly or Which and Trading Standards. Participants on the Samsung community site have advised John Lewis have offered a full refund but of course I am unable to verify this. 

 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

 

Kind regards 

Chris 

CASE-*****
19 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thank you for allowing me the time to investigate your concerns further.
 
I understand you purchased the Samsung television from us in good faith after careful consideration and I’m sorry if you feel John Lewis or Samsung have misled you in anyway. This would certainly never be our intention.
 
I’ve taken advice from our Buying team and also Samsung directly. Samsung didn’t advise the TV would be future proof. This is a statement no brand can guarantee or stand behind. Due to the pace of technology in today’s market, there is no particular model of television that will be completely ‘future ready’,
 
With BBC launching their first Ultra HD HLG broadcast on the iPlayer, I know the TV isn’t capable of viewing this and I acknowledge you’re disappointment along with many others. TV apps, like BBC iPlayer are provided and run by third parties and like Samsung, we have no control over TV apps and software such as BBC iPlayer. It’s only when they know what format the app takes that they can make firmware updates. The maintenance of third-party app services is not included in the terms of the manufacturer’s warranty or the John Lewis 5 year guarantee.
 
Any product within the technology market will always be subjected to being superseded by a model with the most up to date cosmetic requirements and user software. Similarly, to desktop computers and tablet devices, these products require regular updates to be in line with operating system applications. There will be instances the hardware will no longer have the capabilities to perform the updates required.
 
In line with the Consumer Rights Act 2015, if a fault develops after the first six months it is the customers’ responsibility to prove the product was faulty at the time of receipt. As you mention in your email, you are correct in that you do have six years to raise a claim, however the act states this doesn’t mean the product has to last this length of time.
 
I understand, since you purchased the TV in 2016, you’ve had full range of the TV’s capabilities however, since the changes you’re now unable to access selected content, which I appreciate is very frustrating. A television which operates to its specifications would be considered fit for purpose. In your particular case, I understand you’re unhappy with the services being provided by a 3rd party software which unfortunately is not under our duty of care.
 
Whilst, I acknowledge you purchased the television from John Lewis, we advertised the product based on the information provided to us by Samsung at the time. Therefore I would suggest you pursue this further with them.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****

Dear Hayley,

 

Many thanks for your email. I never meant to imply the TV should be future proof but I purchased it only after extensive research and on the basis it included HLG as I knew it would be rolled out soon. For Samsung to now say ah but we meant it only for broadcast and not through an App is misleading and I think I was mislead as this was why I purchased this top of the range TV to ensure I received HLG in all its formats. This issue does therefore affect John Lewis.

 

Samsung also said for HRDR10+ in interviews it would be rolled out for 2016 TV's and to then go back on their word shows the type of company they are. However, I do understand these comments were made after I purchased the TV.

 

I do have to also disagree with you regarding the Smart Hub which was meant to be built into the TV and then the TV would be supplied with a dongle so the Hub could be used. This was how it was advertised. I do appreciate you advertised the TV in good faith based on what Samsung told you but my contract is with you and not Samsung. Under the Consumer Rights Act readdress is therefore due from John Lewis and not Samsung. This is nothing to do with whether the TV functions or not but rather the advertising was incorrect and I do therefore have 6 years to raise this.

 

I do know from the Samsung Community other people with the same issues as me, have Trading Standards and Citizens Rights involved so this issue will not simply disappear.

 

I would be grateful if you could therefore please revisit this as there was false advertising at the time the TV was marketed and which led me to chose a Samsung TV.       

 

Kind regards

Chris

Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for coming back to me.
 
I have duly noted your additional comments and I can appreciate your frustration. At your request I have reviewed your case again, however our stance on this matter remains unchanged.
 
As a retailer we rely on the product information the supplier provides us. We unfortunately have no control over applications being removed from the television or any updates that may be required to use specific applications. Software issues would be the responsibility of the manufacturer (in your case Samsung) to publicise via their own channels.
 
Since 2016, you’ve had full range of the TV’s capabilities. The TV operates to specification in all other aspects without any further fault or issues and therefore works to a satisfactory quality, be considered fit for sale and subsequently would be fit for purpose. The one aspect you have stated it has failed is a result of the BBC streaming of Blue Planet. If there is continued concerns regarding this application and service being provided, Samsung would still be responsible to resolve these issues with BBC. 
 
Unfortunately, we are not in a position to offer a refund or exchange. Whilst I appreciate this may not be the response you’re hoping for, I trust I have clarified our position.


 Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****

Dear Hayley, 

 

I apologise for replying on my mobile as with predictive text I am bound to have some incorrect spelling. However, I thought it important I reply as soon as possible as I do believe you are missing the point. 

 

If you are able to view posts on Samsung Community you will see Citizens Advice have been contacted by some posters and they confirm exactly what I have been saying. 

 

Is the retailer responsible for what is on its website. Answer yes. 

 

Can the retailer state they are not accountable for Samsung rescinding the product. Answer no. As the retailer advertised the product and by doing so it is misrepresentation if the product cannot be delivered and the delivery decision  to buy the TV was based on this which it was. 

 

The remedy under the law is a full cash replacement or the provision of an equivalent TV. 

 

You have not answered my point that the TV was advertised with a built in smart hub and a dongle would be provided. These were not provided. 

 

Please note https://www. johnlewis.com/electricals/samsung/smart-tv/c9601000048?rdr=1.

 

On the Samsung Community site I note Curry's have offered a £549 voucher to someone who bought the 55'K7000 and they keep their TV. My 9000 was considerably more expensive than the 7000. Richer Sounds based on only 1 email from a complainant immediately accepted their liability and have offered the QE55Q8C as a replacement. 

 

I purchased the TV based on representations from John Lewis. My contract is with John Lewis. Liability therefore rests with John Lewis. 

 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

 

Kind regards 

Chris 

CASE-*****
23 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for your additional comments and I’m sorry if you feel I am missing the point.
 
After following the advice from both our Buying Office at Head Office and Samsung, I must stress again that we are not in a position to offer a refund or a replacement.
 
You’ve made reference to the way other retailers have addressed this issue but I’m afraid I am not in a position to comment on this, as any course of action they decide to take is their decision.
 
I understand you may have expected a different outcome but I’m confident with the way I have addressed your concerns in my previous correspondence and therefore we will not be changing our position.
 
I acknowledge you might be disappointed with my response, however I’m afraid I have nothing further to add and we will no longer respond to any further contact.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley

 

Voyager

@Chris325 wrote:

I havent got my original email as went via their email server. However, please find string after that. Sorry for the length. In all the responses they never once dealt with my query re the Smart Hub. Next step is to write to the Chief Exec enclosing this string. I am very unimpressed by their level of customer service saying they would not reply to any further contact. 

 

CASE-*****
17 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for getting in touch about the Samsung K9000 Television, you purchased from us last year.
 
You’ve raised a lot of points and I’d really like the opportunity to investigate this further with our Buying Office and Samsung directly. This will allow me to provide you with a comprehensive response.
 
I’d appreciate if you could allow me some time to look into this and I’ll be in touch once I’ve heard back from our Buying Office.
 
In the meantime if I can be of any assistance please do contact me.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****
Customer Relations Case Manager
John Lewis

Good afternoon Hayley,

 

Many thanks for the update. Samsung name is frankly mud for all the purchasers of their K series of TV with a significant number of people now contacting either their retailer, Samsung directly or Which and Trading Standards. Participants on the Samsung community site have advised John Lewis have offered a full refund but of course I am unable to verify this. 

 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

 

Kind regards 

Chris 

CASE-*****
19 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thank you for allowing me the time to investigate your concerns further.
 
I understand you purchased the Samsung television from us in good faith after careful consideration and I’m sorry if you feel John Lewis or Samsung have misled you in anyway. This would certainly never be our intention.
 
I’ve taken advice from our Buying team and also Samsung directly. Samsung didn’t advise the TV would be future proof. This is a statement no brand can guarantee or stand behind. Due to the pace of technology in today’s market, there is no particular model of television that will be completely ‘future ready’,
 
With BBC launching their first Ultra HD HLG broadcast on the iPlayer, I know the TV isn’t capable of viewing this and I acknowledge you’re disappointment along with many others. TV apps, like BBC iPlayer are provided and run by third parties and like Samsung, we have no control over TV apps and software such as BBC iPlayer. It’s only when they know what format the app takes that they can make firmware updates. The maintenance of third-party app services is not included in the terms of the manufacturer’s warranty or the John Lewis 5 year guarantee.
 
Any product within the technology market will always be subjected to being superseded by a model with the most up to date cosmetic requirements and user software. Similarly, to desktop computers and tablet devices, these products require regular updates to be in line with operating system applications. There will be instances the hardware will no longer have the capabilities to perform the updates required.
 
In line with the Consumer Rights Act 2015, if a fault develops after the first six months it is the customers’ responsibility to prove the product was faulty at the time of receipt. As you mention in your email, you are correct in that you do have six years to raise a claim, however the act states this doesn’t mean the product has to last this length of time.
 
I understand, since you purchased the TV in 2016, you’ve had full range of the TV’s capabilities however, since the changes you’re now unable to access selected content, which I appreciate is very frustrating. A television which operates to its specifications would be considered fit for purpose. In your particular case, I understand you’re unhappy with the services being provided by a 3rd party software which unfortunately is not under our duty of care.
 
Whilst, I acknowledge you purchased the television from John Lewis, we advertised the product based on the information provided to us by Samsung at the time. Therefore I would suggest you pursue this further with them.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****

Dear Hayley,

 

Many thanks for your email. I never meant to imply the TV should be future proof but I purchased it only after extensive research and on the basis it included HLG as I knew it would be rolled out soon. For Samsung to now say ah but we meant it only for broadcast and not through an App is misleading and I think I was mislead as this was why I purchased this top of the range TV to ensure I received HLG in all its formats. This issue does therefore affect John Lewis.

 

Samsung also said for HRDR10+ in interviews it would be rolled out for 2016 TV's and to then go back on their word shows the type of company they are. However, I do understand these comments were made after I purchased the TV.

 

I do have to also disagree with you regarding the Smart Hub which was meant to be built into the TV and then the TV would be supplied with a dongle so the Hub could be used. This was how it was advertised. I do appreciate you advertised the TV in good faith based on what Samsung told you but my contract is with you and not Samsung. Under the Consumer Rights Act readdress is therefore due from John Lewis and not Samsung. This is nothing to do with whether the TV functions or not but rather the advertising was incorrect and I do therefore have 6 years to raise this.

 

I do know from the Samsung Community other people with the same issues as me, have Trading Standards and Citizens Rights involved so this issue will not simply disappear.

 

I would be grateful if you could therefore please revisit this as there was false advertising at the time the TV was marketed and which led me to chose a Samsung TV.       

 

Kind regards

Chris

Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for coming back to me.
 
I have duly noted your additional comments and I can appreciate your frustration. At your request I have reviewed your case again, however our stance on this matter remains unchanged.
 
As a retailer we rely on the product information the supplier provides us. We unfortunately have no control over applications being removed from the television or any updates that may be required to use specific applications. Software issues would be the responsibility of the manufacturer (in your case Samsung) to publicise via their own channels.
 
Since 2016, you’ve had full range of the TV’s capabilities. The TV operates to specification in all other aspects without any further fault or issues and therefore works to a satisfactory quality, be considered fit for sale and subsequently would be fit for purpose. The one aspect you have stated it has failed is a result of the BBC streaming of Blue Planet. If there is continued concerns regarding this application and service being provided, Samsung would still be responsible to resolve these issues with BBC. 
 
Unfortunately, we are not in a position to offer a refund or exchange. Whilst I appreciate this may not be the response you’re hoping for, I trust I have clarified our position.


 Kind regards,
  
Hayley *****

Dear Hayley, 

 

I apologise for replying on my mobile as with predictive text I am bound to have some incorrect spelling. However, I thought it important I reply as soon as possible as I do believe you are missing the point. 

 

If you are able to view posts on Samsung Community you will see Citizens Advice have been contacted by some posters and they confirm exactly what I have been saying. 

 

Is the retailer responsible for what is on its website. Answer yes. 

 

Can the retailer state they are not accountable for Samsung rescinding the product. Answer no. As the retailer advertised the product and by doing so it is misrepresentation if the product cannot be delivered and the delivery decision  to buy the TV was based on this which it was. 

 

The remedy under the law is a full cash replacement or the provision of an equivalent TV. 

 

You have not answered my point that the TV was advertised with a built in smart hub and a dongle would be provided. These were not provided. 

 

Please note https://www. johnlewis.com/electricals/samsung/smart-tv/c9601000048?rdr=1.

 

On the Samsung Community site I note Curry's have offered a £549 voucher to someone who bought the 55'K7000 and they keep their TV. My 9000 was considerably more expensive than the 7000. Richer Sounds based on only 1 email from a complainant immediately accepted their liability and have offered the QE55Q8C as a replacement. 

 

I purchased the TV based on representations from John Lewis. My contract is with John Lewis. Liability therefore rests with John Lewis. 

 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

 

Kind regards 

Chris 

CASE-*****
23 January 2018
 
Dear Chris,
 
Thanks for your additional comments and I’m sorry if you feel I am missing the point.
 
After following the advice from both our Buying Office at Head Office and Samsung, I must stress again that we are not in a position to offer a refund or a replacement.
 
You’ve made reference to the way other retailers have addressed this issue but I’m afraid I am not in a position to comment on this, as any course of action they decide to take is their decision.
 
I understand you may have expected a different outcome but I’m confident with the way I have addressed your concerns in my previous correspondence and therefore we will not be changing our position.
 
I acknowledge you might be disappointed with my response, however I’m afraid I have nothing further to add and we will no longer respond to any further contact.
 
Kind regards,
  
Hayley

 


You need to contact citizens advice bureau and trading standards and report John Lewis to advertising standards agency

Explorer

 A very dissapointing response from John Lewis indeed. The audacity of the last sentance is astounding: "I acknowledge you might be disappointed with my response, however I’m afraid I have nothing further to add and we will no longer respond to any further contact."

 

That being said it does seem that their responses are focused on the HLG iPlayer update. I would move away from this where possible and focus on the SmartThings issue as that is the only concrete part that is mis-representation. John Lewis can only be held accountable for what they advertised regardless if Samsung revoke a promised feature or not, they advertised it.

 

It may also be worth trying to email the John Lewis management higher up if possible stating that washing their hands of this issue and not responding is not going to make it go away. I would get advice from CAB, report them to trading standards & the ASA . Don't give up Chris!

Black Belt 

@matlough wrote:

@Chris325 wrote:

JL Head Office have just basically told me to foxtrot oscar. Richer Sounds it is then for my next TV! 


I’m STILL waiting for a reply! What specifically did they say? Are you going to pursue?

 

 


Phone Citizens Advice and explain and they will tell you if you have a case. I explained and that was what I was told. They will then advise you on your options. Also inform them that Richer Sounds have already replaced someones TV already

Paul

Explorer

Cheers. I am going to write directly to the Chief Exec as I can't imagine either they will be happy with the attitude of their customer service or the fact they misrepresented a product they sold and their direct association with this.

Highlighted
Helping Hand

JL not so excellent customer service then.

Explorer

Curry's did replace another community members television after they were in store for 4 hours. On the AV Forums owners thread there is also another user mentioning that Richer Sounds have also offered to replace their television set as well as replacing my own.

 

My opening email to RS was as follows, edit/amend as you deem necessary but may be a good starting point for some:

 

"Dear Sir/Madam

 

On the XX of Month 20XX I purchased a UE55KS9000 television from the PLACENAME store. When I purchased the television it was advertised by Richer Sounds on your website as:

 

"Samsung SUHD TVs are IOT ready and allow you to create your very own SmartThings ecosystem

Experience a new world of possibilities as Samsung's SUHD TVs enable you to create your very own SmartThings ecosystem. With a wide variety of sensors and inputs work harmoniously with your TV you can control everything from lighting to heating, monitor your baby sleeping or check homework is being done all directly controllable from your SUHD TV.”

 

A copy of your website advertising the KS9000 is saved from the XX of Month 20XX & another copy with the SmartThings text still present after my purchased date on XX of Month 20XX: https://web.archive.org/web/20161104014350/http://www.richersounds.com:80/product/tv---all/samsung/u... - Swap for your retailers page relative to your model
https://web.archive.org/web/20161222234235/http://www.richersounds.com:80/product/tv---all/samsung/u... - Swap for your retailers page relative to your model

 

There is also a video of the Samsung CEO stating at the Consumer Electronics Show 2016 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRSWoUmU5YQ) saying that "This will enable users of our 2016 SUHD TV's to control IOT features directly from their TV screens via the SmartThings platform" this was then advertised by COMPANY NAME and heavily influenced my decision to purchase this model of television and Samsung have since revoked this feature.

 

Samsung have gone back on this and stated that the USB device to allow the TV to be part of the SmartThings eco system will not ever be released and as such this is a breach of the 2015 Consumer rights act for misrepresentation I have included an extract from Samsung UK customer services:

 

"Good afternoon YOUR NAME, 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.

 

Thank you for contacting us with your concerns.

 

Regards
Kirsty
Customer Services Executive | UK & Eire”

 

Before I start a section 75 claim with my credit card company I wanted to do the right thing and inform you that I wish to exercise my right to a full refund as the TV was sold with misrepresentation, albeit not knowingly by COMPANY NAME however as the retailer my right to refund lies with you.

 

I am more than happy to return the TV to you. I have attached a copy of my receipt so you can verify the purchase. I look forward to your response.

 

Kind regards"

Voyager

@daleski75 wrote:

JL not so excellent customer service then.


I see that both JL and Currys give floor space to Samsung reps who repeat same lies on smart things and upgradable OCB, so they both are responsible for things advertised by Samsung, tobe fair to Currys they have rectified by offering something but JL are too arrogant, I would be advising everyone against buying from JL, will report them to ASA today

Voyager

@Chris325 wrote:

Cheers. I am going to write directly to the Chief Exec as I can't imagine either they will be happy with the attitude of their customer service or the fact they misrepresented a product they sold and their direct association with this.


Don't forget to mention that JL give their floor space to Samsung rep who even today claim ocb are upgradable, and promise smart things, therefore JL share full responsibility of Samsung advertising!

Top Liked Authors