Support

Open search

KS Owners refund

Highlighted
Black Belt 

Do all you good people who bought a 2016 Samsung TV know Samsung have stopped supporting it. The promised they would support HLG (BBC Iplayer HDR). This was in the Dec 2016 Trusted Reviews and What Hi Fi. They have not and if you had bought a Panasonic or LG 2016 set you would be able to watch Iplayer Blue Planet 2 in glorious HLG. This is a big issue because HLG looks like the standard for all over the air broadcasting. Samsung are not even supporting a 4K update to Iplayer. The reason looks like it will cost just 5 cents or pence per unit. So my telly I bought in Jan 2017 is deemed as out of date by Samsung!!!!!!

You wrote in your Dec 2016 issue that Samsung were supporting HLG in their 2016 models. Do you know that Samsung have supported their 2017 models but not the 2016 models. I know because the BBC IPlayer Blue Planet 2 will not play in 4K or HLG. It's not good considering Panasonic and LG both do support their 2016 models. It means my KS model I bought in Jan is now deemed out of date by Samsung. It looks like their are royalty fees which Samsung will not pay! Not good.


All you people in the UK can return your KS TVs IF you bought it for the use of the smartthings Extend that will never be coming out for our TVs. ***** is how.

 

Tell them you want a full refund because they promised that if you bought a KS TV you would get a FREE Smartthings Extend. They proof you will need is easy to find and is the reason you bought this TV.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMc3V98yzNY

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRSWoUmU5YQ

I bought mine from J Lewis and the Samsung Extend addvert is still there https://www.johnlewis.com/electricals/samsung/smart-tv/c9601000048?rdr=1

 

If you bought your KS TV from currys http://techtalk.currys.co.uk/tv-gaming/tv/how-to-control-your-home-from-your-smart-tv/

 

They both say that you will get a free smartthings extend USB dongle.

Now send you TVs back for a full refund Smiley Happy

 

 

All those who bought a Samsung TV in 2016 may have claim for miss selling. It basically means that all you folks who bought the 2016 Samsung units have 2 choices. After Dec 2016 and if you had seen any articles that are press release's about HLG support and that influenced you decision to buy may have a case. For all those owners who read the info from the retailers on their web pages and saw and was influenced by the promise of the smart connect which has not been honoured, then you also have a case for miss selling. If you all spread this in all available media then I am sure the retailers would put pressure on to Samsung to correct this. If nothing else you could end up with nice shiny LG or Panasonic, or the new Philips that all are HLG BBC iplayer compatible, and with the HDR10 plus that again Samsung have still not implemented, you may be best with LG and Dolby Vision.

Also take a copy of the retailers web page before they change the description.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRSWoUmU5YQ

I will try to explain how to get a refund for miss selling (seen how much the LG's have come down). I followed this way and got a full refund or a JS8000.

You need to show that you asked or believed that or influenced by claims made about the capabilities of the TV. With BBC Iplayer HLG it's from the Trusted reviews and What Hi Fi, and any other publications and if you asked the retailer.

 

https://www.whathifi.com/advice/hdr-tv-what-it-how-can-you-get-it#6locceZo3Zf8yi5T.99

you can show you had been informed.

It's different with the smart connect as that is advertised on the main retailers web sites,

https://www.johnlewis.com/electricals/samsung/smart-tv/c9601000048?rdr=1
http://techtalk.currys.co.uk/tv-gaming/tv/how-to-control-your-home-from-your-smart-tv/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRSWoUmU5YQ

As the donngle's have not turned up you now claim miss selling, so either go to your retailer or email them with the web page, and explain why you think you were miss sold. Also phone Citizens Advice 03444 111 444 and raise a case (this also gets past on to Trading Standards). Explain that the retailer informed you off the capabilities via their web page information, and either show the page printer or the link, as above.

They will advise and link you to some template letters to send to your retailer.

I had to send a letter of intent to take legal action (template from Citizens Advice) against Curry's but then they gave me a refund.

So mention all the promises from Samsung full support for HLG, Smart Connect, and HDR10+

It will cost nothing to ask and again may bring some pressure on to Samsung.

2,530 REPLIES 2,530
Highlighted

Depends. If they offered it 'without prejudice' then it can't be used as an admission of them being in the wrong.

 

However they are very much in the wrong so the case is a slam-dunk even without that.


@Moily wrote:

Depends. If they offered it 'without prejudice' then it can't be used as an admission of them being in the wrong.

 

However they are very much in the wrong so the case is a slam-dunk even without that.


I have not seen the "without prejudice " on any of the replies from them,  and you can not get away with that if you are infact breaking the law. It is now so clear that they have made a big mistake by offering compensation because you do not do that if you do not think you are in the wrong. They would have been better denying are wrong doing,  but they have and we have it recorded by the people here in black and white. 

Paul

Highlighted

@paul1277 wrote:

@Moily wrote:

Depends. If they offered it 'without prejudice' then it can't be used as an admission of them being in the wrong.

 

However they are very much in the wrong so the case is a slam-dunk even without that.


I have not seen the "without prejudice " on any of the replies from them,  and you can not get away with that if you are infact breaking the law. It is now so clear that they have made a big mistake by offering compensation because you do not do that if you do not think you are in the wrong. They would have been better denying are wrong doing,  but they have and we have it recorded by the people here in black and white. 

Paul


You cannot use any correspondence sent 'Without Prejudice' in a court hearing or evidentiary filing.

 

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3a52bd62-ce7e-471d-8802-89e0fe69a439

Highlighted

and the absence of 'without prejudice' on an offer isn't necessarily an admission of culpability either. It could be a gesture of goodwill towards a customer even if they disagree with their grievance.

 

By all means include it in a claim (if there's no 'without prejudice' statement) but the main focus should be the fact that they have mis-sold the item in the first place and have contravened the Consumer Regs in not offering full refund or suitable replacement.

Highlighted

@Moily wrote:

and the absence of 'without prejudice' on an offer isn't necessarily an admission of culpability either. It could be a gesture of goodwill towards a customer even if they disagree with their grievance.

 

By all means include it in a claim (if there's no 'without prejudice' statement) but the main focus should be the fact that they have mis-sold the item in the first place and have contravened the Consumer Regs in not offering full refund or suitable replacement.


Had an interesting private discussion with tell and the retailers could argue that the offer is reasonable compensation for a faulty tv. That is why we have to be absolutely clear that the issue is misrepresentation as defined in the Oct 2015 European consumer regs. 

Paul

Highlighted

13/07/18

________________________

 

Thank you for your reply. As advised in previous correspondence, we feel the explanation offered is fair and will not be offering an alternative outcome. I regret we were not able to resolve this issue to your satisfaction.

Thank you for contacting John Lewis.

_________________________

 

Is this the dreaded deadlock?

Highlighted

 


@paul1277 wrote:


Had an interesting private discussion with tell and the retailers could argue that the offer is reasonable compensation for a faulty tv. That is why we have to be absolutely clear that the issue is misrepresentation as defined in the Oct 2015 European consumer regs. 

Paul


With "tell"? Who is that.

 

I agree, for faults, the offers are reasonable , even generous in some cases for a TV completely out of waranty.

 

And yes it's the misrepresentation thing that they are deliberately not getting. As in the case of the JL response above. "I regret that we were" - WERE, past tense, as if that statement closes the issue. The sheer arrogance of these people!

 

Highlighted

@mrtickle wrote:

 


@paul1277 wrote:


Had an interesting private discussion with tell and the retailers could argue that the offer is reasonable compensation for a faulty tv. That is why we have to be absolutely clear that the issue is misrepresentation as defined in the Oct 2015 European consumer regs. 

Paul


With "tell"? Who is that.

 

I agree, for faults, the offers are reasonable , even generous in some cases for a TV completely out of waranty.

 

And yes it's the misrepresentation thing that they are deliberately not getting. As in the case of the JL response above. "I regret that we were" - WERE, past tense, as if that statement closes the issue. The sheer arrogance of these people!

 


He is @Tell who had a private conversation but does not want it on the forum for some reason.

I agree for faults but not misrepresentation so be really clear about this.

 

Highlighted
I have responded to John Lewis one last time to give them an option to reconsider.

_______________________________________

I would like to take this opportunity to urge you to look over the facts once more as John Lewis are on the wrong side of the law.

In summary:

- John Lewis has admitted that the television had been advertised to come with the USB SmartThings Dongle (this is a physical item - separate from the software) at the time of purchase.
- John Lewis will not provide the USB SmartThings Dongle that had been advertised to me, the customer.
- The television is not faulty or unfit for purpose. It is missing the USB SmartThings Dongle which was clearly advertised, and acknowledged to be advertised to be included with the television.
- This is a clear breach of the "As Described" clause of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

I await your reconsideration. If your stance is still unchanged after 14 days, I will be filing a small claims court case against John Lewis.
_________________________________

If it's not resolved, then I WILL be taking them to the small claims court.
Highlighted
Would be useful if people can let others know of us here on this apt thread,
https://community.smartthings.com/t/samsung-reveals-entire-2016-smart-tv-line-up-will-be-iot-ready/3...

I have posted but more the merrier,
Paul
Top Liked Authors