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

[ewanstancarr]

So, of the nigh on 400 TVs supported in BBC iplayer for the Blue Planet II  HLG episodes none are from Samsung. Oh joy. 

...

Moderator edit: Original thread title was "Blue Planet 2 HLG - No Samsung". With the OP's permission, the title was changed on 12/03/2018 to accurately reflect the dominant theme of the thread as it has progressed. If the reader would like to know more about the HLG format, please check out the BBC's page and FAQ's on it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/high-dynamic-range Thank you, AntS.

[richardg]

---

@Sam-Knp wrote:

Just received a response from Samsung uk on Twitter

“We have enabled all 2016 UHD TV with UHD HDR HLG for Broadcast Services as promised. It must be noted this does not include IHD HDR HLG Content delivered via the BBC i-Player Application as this is not a Broadcast Service.” 

As I have said many times before, ask them how 2017 TV’s can now access this non-broadcast Service and why the same solution has not been applied to earlier TV models.

---

[daleski75]

This is a very interesting read guys.

Dear Mr Kilborn,

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.

Kind regards,

Paul

Citizens Advice Consumer Service

Tel: 03454 04 05 06

Web: www.citizensadvice.org.uk

[richardg]

I am not a lawyer but, if I was constructing a case around HLG, I would take this approach: 

The fact that 2017 TVs can now support the relevant standards for non-broadcast services means that it is technically possible for Samsung/BBC to achieve this on their software/hardware platform. Therefore, the failure to apply this technique to pre-2017 models is either because a) there is a technical limitation present in older models that does not apply to the 2017 range or b) no such limitation exists but Samsung have made a commercial decision not to apply this technque to older sets. 

Whichever is the case then Samsung would have to show that they specifically excluded support for relevant non-broadcast service standards when describing the capabilities of pre-2017 models.  I would check all claims made at the time for any small print about limitation of support for the relevant standards. Otherwise, it would seem reasonable for purchasers to assume that all such content would be supported. If someone says "standard X" is supported then that inlcudes all subtypes of "standard X" unless specifically excluded.

If a) is the case, then the only redress would be a physical add-on or replacement TV. If b) then whatever software changes have been applied to 2017 TVs should be applied to older sets.

I repeat, I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a case could be constructed along these lines.

[Ste_A]

OK Samsung, I think you've had long enough! How about a response?
I purchased my 49KS7000 from John Lewis which was delivered 2nd March 2017. It was a current model in 2017!! We all know that it is possible to update the BBC iplayer app but for some reason you have decided not to. I and many others want to know why. That's a simple question for you to answer; WHY WON'T YOU UPDATE THE BBC IPLAYER APP TO SUPPORT 4K HLG CONTENT?

I hate faceless companies that think it's acceptable to ignore their customers. Remember you only exist because of your customers.

So come on Samsung, we want a response and not some pigeon english generic scripted one either. You've had more than an reasonable amount of time to discuss this matter. Do Samsung even care?

[richardg]

This is pure speculation (but in the absence of any Samsung statement what else do we have?) but I suspect that they have discovered that there is an additional cost to apply the relevant changes to pre-2017 models. One possible reason for this is that their software achitecture is inflexible and that the components developed for the 2017 models cannot simply be appled to older models. This would indicate poor component design. The consequences would be custom software component designs for each model year and extensive retesting of every individual software platform version. One way out of this would be to engage customers (hah!) in a planned beta programme to get the testing done through user involvement. Again, this is speculative, but it would be highly embarrassing for Samsung to admit their software platform was poorly designed and inflexible. Is that why they are silent?

[daleski75]

I would be incredibly surprised if we get any form of contact from Samsung at all, I can't see any technical reason why this cannot be done as the panel and underlying hardware supports HLG and it's just laziness on the part of Samsung and also shows absolute contempt for existing customers.

If there is a technical reason or a limitation then Samsung should of made this clear when this issue was reported rather than choosing to ignore it's customers.

Even if Samsung pull through and releae 4k iPlayer support with HLG the damage has already been done and I feel the majority of people here would not buy a Samsung tv again.

[paul1277]

---

@daleski75 wrote:

This is a very interesting read guys.

Dear Mr Kilborn,

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.

Kind regards,

Paul

Citizens Advice Consumer Service

Tel: 03454 04 05 06

Web: www.citizensadvice.org.uk

---

What I have been saying. NO TIME LIMITS, copy and add this to your letters, and thanks for posting this here. Could also post into Samsung refud and ks refund threads.

Paul

[TastyBurger666]

Interesting.... the new commercial for Garmin's new watch, the Forerunner 645, has a picture of it connected to a Samsung Smartthings hub.

Also, are we keeping an eye on CES? Samsung seem to be peddling the same line of offering features for the 2018 sets that require firmware updates down the line. 

[daleski75]

I have already posted my letter of intent however if Curry's still play hard ball I will just send the responses from Trading Standards (if I get one) and the one from citizens advice.

Updated the other threads and I believe Curry's are fully aware of the law but play on customers believing what they state without them doing further research.

[cyenz]

I´ve dealt with companies that had a very bad customer support over the last decade but Samsung is blantantly ignoring their customers, in a way that i never experienced in any other major brand and i´ve gone through the period of owning LG products during early 2010 but they clearly learned (not perfect though) from the past mistakes and started to value their current consumers as well as the potential ones.
Samsung does not really care, they want their tvs to become obsolete in a year or two like they do with their smarthphone business. But a TV is not a smartphone, a TV is a several thousand euros investment. I deeply regret that i bought a KS8000 last year, i almost bought the LG equivalent and unlucky me that i didnt since that model has Dolby Vision, HDR10, HLG and they are constantly updating the features not removing like Samsung.