Support

Open search

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

Voyager

@Jones1 wrote:

I've not taken anything through small claims but my understanding is the process is fairly customer friendly and in the main done in writing, having worked for several large companies in relevant areas I'm fairly sure they will pay your request if you go to small claims as it will not be worth there time trying to defend it , regarding the missell unless you can evidence you purchased the product on the basis it came with the dongle I'm fairly sure you will struggle  I think the issue is that if you purchased the tv on the basis it came with a dongle it would be reasonable to assume you would have reported this at an earlier date, whilst you can claim miss sell for six years there still needs to be consideration as to whether you purchased the set on this basis, whereas hlg issue is much more relevant, if any one does pursue this though would be interested in the outcome! 


I never had to go through small courts as 2-3 of my issues have been resolved by following advice from trading standards, will wait for Samsung and currys to communicate and if they try to wiggle around then will take Curry's to the court as I paid money to Curry's not Samsung

Helping Hand

@hdmi wrote:

@Jones1 wrote:

I've not taken anything through small claims but my understanding is the process is fairly customer friendly and in the main done in writing, having worked for several large companies in relevant areas I'm fairly sure they will pay your request if you go to small claims as it will not be worth there time trying to defend it , regarding the missell unless you can evidence you purchased the product on the basis it came with the dongle I'm fairly sure you will struggle  I think the issue is that if you purchased the tv on the basis it came with a dongle it would be reasonable to assume you would have reported this at an earlier date, whilst you can claim miss sell for six years there still needs to be consideration as to whether you purchased the set on this basis, whereas hlg issue is much more relevant, if any one does pursue this though would be interested in the outcome! 


I never had to go through small courts as 2-3 of my issues have been resolved by following advice from trading standards, will 


Trading Standard will get back to me within 3 working days on mine so I should get a written response by Friday all been good.

Voyager

BTW. the 2016 CES was held 6th to 9th of January 2016. 

Hotshot

I would like to address the issue of people who bought using the store's credit, either interest free or not. Believe it or not you have as much, if not better protection, and read on as there could be a nice surprise at the end.

I had an issue 20 years ago when I bought a TV, video player, and Sat system on an interest free store loan. I found out the Sat system was second hand, but had been sold to me as new. I complain to the retailer and was fobbed off (again raise the issue with the retailer and keep copies). I did a bit of research and found that under the 1974 credit act when you buy an item on a loan agreement that item again must be as described and you enter into a legally binding contract. Once you sign and pay the deposit the goods are legally yours. Here is the kicker (for the retailer) if there is a breach of that contract i.e. by miss selling then you are entitled to a full refund of all monies, and you also get to keep the item, as it is legally yours. The agreement can not be enforced if there is a breach, so you can advise the loan company that due to the miss selling of that item you are with holding payments until the breach is readied. I have been through this process and it worked. It did not cost me a penny and I got a full refund from the loan company, and kept the equipment. I did not have to threaten court either and again I think the FSA will investigate if you are fobbed off.

That link that shows the smart connect video I think proves miss selling, and again I do not think there is a time limit whilst you are still paying. I am not sure about when the loan has finished but Trading Standards should know. I always think a interest free load with a deposit over £100 paid on your credit card is the best way as you get far more protection.

Hope it helps, and again do not get fobbed off with this time thing.

Paul

Helping Hand

@paul1111 wrote:

I would like to address the issue of people who bought using the store's credit, either interest free or not. Believe it or not you have as much, if not better protection, and read on as there could be a nice surprise at the end.

I had an issue 20 years ago when I bought a TV, video player, and Sat system on an interest free store loan. I found out the Sat system was second hand, but had been sold to me as new. I complain to the retailer and was fobbed off (again raise the issue with the retailer and keep copies). I did a bit of research and found that under the 1974 credit act when you buy an item on a loan agreement that item again must be as described and you enter into a legally binding contract. Once you sign and pay the deposit the goods are legally yours. Here is the kicker (for the retailer) if there is a breach of that contract i.e. by miss selling then you are entitled to a full refund of all monies, and you also get to keep the item, as it is legally yours. The agreement can not be enforced if there is a breach, so you can advise the loan company that due to the miss selling of that item you are with holding payments until the breach is readied. I have been through this process and it worked. It did not cost me a penny and I got a full refund from the loan company, and kept the equipment. I did not have to threaten court either and again I think the FSA will investigate if you are fobbed off.

That link that shows the smart connect video I think proves miss selling, and again I do not think there is a time limit whilst you are still paying. I am not sure about when the loan has finished but Trading Standards should know. I always think a interest free load with a deposit over £100 paid on your credit card is the best way as you get far more protection.

Hope it helps, and again do not get fobbed off with this time thing.

Paul


My 12 months buy now pay later ended 25/07/17 when I paid off the money remaining to the loan company which Currys used when I purchased the television.

 

Bit confused though as it states under section 75 you cannot claim anything if the lender is the same company who you purchased the item from however the lender was creation finance in my case so the lender is different as it's not directly through curry's so does this mean I could or could not claim under section 75?

Helping Hand

I might have a case for section 75

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/goods-and-services-bought-with-cr...

 

Section 75 only applies where goods or services are bought using types of consumer credit where arrangements are already in place between the supplier of the goods and the provider of the credit. When the consumer uses that credit to make a purchase, this creates the necessary connection between the consumer, the lender and the supplier.

 

For section 75 to apply, the provider of the credit and the supplier of the goods need to be separate businesses. Occasionally we see a complaint where the supplier of the goods has itself made the loan to the consumer to buy the goods - so no claim is possible under section 75.

 

Supplier of finance - creation

Supplier of goods - currys

 

My thoughts are that currys would already have an agreement in place with creation who do the finance thus section 75 applies.

Hotshot

As said section 75 only applies when purchasing with a credit card. Then credit consumer regs I am on about is if you buy through there credit on a loan basis. That is why if you pay a deposit with your credit card (I think over a £100), then section 75 will apply. So all you people who paid a deposit om credit card and took out a store loan you have a triple whammy, section 75, Oct 2015 European Consumer Regs, and the consumer credit 1974.

Paul

Helping Hand

Yes, good point. If you paid with a credit card, the CC company and the retailer are jointly liable. This is fantastic consumer protection because, thanks to lying companies like Currys who willfully flout the law forcing people to threaten court action just to get their rights, you can instead do it via the CC company.

 

We have the same level of proof as before - screenshots showing the advertising, etc. I don't know about the 6-year timespan though if going the CC route, but it can be less painful. The CC company then fight with Curry's behind the scenes after you've had your money back.

 

One tip whilst we're on the subject: you don't need to pay the full amount using the credit card to get the full protection. Very useful when buying expensive items like cars and holidays from retailers who try to pull a fast one - by charging you a percentage if you use a CC, instead of absorbing their costs like they do with their electricity bills, rents, and all their other costs of doing business. For some reason, they think it's ok to pass on this one cost directly. No it isn't.

 

If you pay just the desposit on a credit card, and then the rest of the balance any other way - you still get the full section 75 protection. Not many people realise this (it was on BBC Radio 4 Moneybox).

 

Helping Hand

@mrtickle wrote:

Yes, good point. If you paid with a credit card, the CC company and the retailer are jointly liable. This is fantastic consumer protection because, thanks to lying companies like Currys who willfully flout the law forcing people to threaten court action just to get their rights, you can instead do it via the CC company.

 

We have the same level of proof as before - screenshots showing the advertising, etc. I don't know about the 6-year timespan though if going the CC route, but it can be less painful. The CC company then fight with Curry's behind the scenes after you've had your money back.

 

One tip whilst we're on the subject: you don't need to pay the full amount using the credit card to get the full protection. Very useful when buying expensive items like cars and holidays from retailers who try to pull a fast one - by charging you a percentage if you use a CC, instead of absorbing their costs like they do with their electricity bills, rents, and all their other costs of doing business. For some reason, they think it's ok to pass on this one cost directly. No it isn't.

 

If you pay just the desposit on a credit card, and then the rest of the balance any other way - you still get the full section 75 protection. Not many people realise this (it was on BBC Radio 4 Moneybox).

 


Time to go through my old credit card statements to see how much I paid for the deposit if I did use my credit card.

Hotshot

Also the new rules have come into force this month which bans any credit card company from charging for using a credit card. Also think it applies to pay pal as well. They also see it as a rip off which has now been stopped. 

 

Let's also keep on message which is the no HLG support for our TV's. I think if Samsung did the right thing and switched on the BBC Iplayer UHD and HLG support I would settle for that, but not if they will not honor any of their promises.

I asked Samsung support again about the free dongle, and again they ignored it and just repeated that they have no plans to enable the HLG in older sets for the BBC Iplayer.

Paul

Top Liked Authors