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 So my telly I bought in Jan 2017 is deemed as out of date by Samsung!!!!!!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 It means my KS model I bought in Jan is now deemed out of date by Samsung.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.

2,542 REPLIES 2,542
Highlighted

@Tyler_Durden wrote:

I have just come to answer point 2.

2. The TV was provided with a 12 month guarantee covering parts and labour but which excluded damage caused by accident, misuse, neglect or fair wear and tear

 

I realised that I took out the "Whatever Happens" insurance policy that I am still paying for, and wonder whether this policy has cover for this kind of incident. Perhaps I could have avoided all this by requesting a refund through the policy rather than Currys direct!


Again it shows they do not have all the correct information and you can show that with point 2, as you can prove that you took out extra cover which they should know about. 

Highlighted

If you're relying on misrepresentation, then read up on the advice at http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967

 

Remember, you're accusing them of "Innocent misrepresentation", not fraudulent or negligent.

 

But, in particular, note this bit about timeliness, and be clear on when you first became aware of their failure to provide the dongle, which is when you should have reported this to them.  It's the bit that John Lewis's solicitors were using in my case as a defence, as JL said the dongle would be available by the end of 2016, at which time I should have reported the misrepresentation.

 

Limitations of a misrepresentation

There are certain limitations on the right to unwinding a contract.

For example, if you are aware of a misrepresentation but choose to continue with the contract (either in writing or through conduct), you will not then be able to go back to the person who made the misrepresentation and end the contract, or indeed go to court and ask them to unwind the contract if you change your mind later. 

In law, you would be taken to have “affirmed” the contract. 

Highlighted

My argument is that I was patiently waiting while the dongle was delayed. Once the announcment came in July 2018 that the dongle would not be supplied I began my claim wihin 30 days of the annoucment. 

Highlighted

@Moily wrote:

M,@Tyler_Durden wrote:

My money claim has just been updated at the last minute.

 

"Claim status

The defendant’s response

DSG Retail Ltd has rejected the claim. They’ve suggested mediation to help resolve this dispute.

Find out how mediation works (PDF, 399KB) (opens in a new window)

You need to email moneyclaims@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk before 6 October 2018 to tell us if you agree to mediation or not.

If you don’t send an email before the deadline, the claim will proceed without mediation."

 

What do I do now? 


It would be prudent to agree to mediation. That involves a conference call with an independent mediator and the Defendant and is a final attempt to agree to settle the claim before it gets to a hearing. There's no obligation for you to accept anything as a result of that mediation, nor to even have the call, but it shows the Court that you are being reasonable in attempting to resolve the issue.

 

The mediation call gives you an opportunity to address the Defendant's response to your claim. It would be worth going through it, writing down bullet points shooting down each of their false statements so that you can express it clearly and calmly.

 

Depending on how that goes they MAY propose a settlement offer but it will unlikely be the full value of the claim. In case they do make an offer, have a think about the minimum you'd be willing to accept.  Having said that, this is Currys so they may well look to take it all the way.


Remember, the mediator has no other objective in mind other than to avoid this going to a court hearing. 

 

Currys will have a lawyer representing them who will have done this many times and you are unlikely to have done this before.  Make sure you know clearly what you want and what the law says is your right.  The mediator really doesn't care who wins or loses as long as it doesn't take up any court time.

Highlighted

@tarbat wrote:

If you're relying on misrepresentation, then read up on the advice at http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967

 

Remember, you're accusing them of "Innocent misrepresentation", not fraudulent or negligent.

 

But, in particular, note this bit about timeliness, and be clear on when you first became aware of their failure to provide the dongle, which is when you should have reported this to them.  It's the bit that John Lewis's solicitors were using in my case as a defence, as JL said the dongle would be available by the end of 2016, at which time I should have reported the misrepresentation.

 

Limitations of a misrepresentation

There are certain limitations on the right to unwinding a contract.

For example, if you are aware of a misrepresentation but choose to continue with the contract (either in writing or through conduct), you will not then be able to go back to the person who made the misrepresentation and end the contract, or indeed go to court and ask them to unwind the contract if you change your mind later. 

In law, you would be taken to have “affirmed” the contract. 


@Tyler_Durden I don't know what your original claim specifics were but this ^^ is what I would be concentrating on with the mediation and hearing, if I were you. The Misrepresentation Act 1967 is not part of the Consumer Rights Act so the 'Innocent Misrepresentation' would not be conveyed by referring to that, just the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

 

Note, IANAL though so have a read up of both, to make sure of where your argument lies and what you wish to contend in mediation and at the hearing.

Highlighted

@Tyler_Durden wrote:

My argument is that I was patiently waiting while the dongle was delayed. Once the announcment came in July 2018 that the dongle would not be supplied I began my claim wihin 30 days of the annoucment. 


Be ready for the argument that you should have asked the retailer about the missing dongle earlier, rather than relying on statements on twitter and in this forum by a third party (Samsung).

Highlighted

@tarbat wrote:

@Tyler_Durden wrote:

My argument is that I was patiently waiting while the dongle was delayed. Once the announcment came in July 2018 that the dongle would not be supplied I began my claim wihin 30 days of the annoucment. 


Be ready for the argument that you should have asked the retailer about the missing dongle earlier, rather than relying on statements on twitter and in this forum by a third party (Samsung).


I see that as a possible  issue but,  civil court is about what is reasonable and I think you should be able to show it is not unreasonable to rely on statements from the manufacturer as to when the dongle would be made available.  You can show this was a correct decision as it was from the moderator on this forum who informed us that the dongle would not be made available, not the retailers, and that was only a few months back. 

Highlighted

@Tyler_Durden, if you go to mediation, it’s worth thinking about what compromise, if any, you’d accept. If Currys insist on a reduced refund based on your 2 years of use, argue that the TV was expected to last at least 10 years.  That’s based on the no-burn-in guarantee that was provided on the KS TVs. Of course only you can decide if you’re open to a compromise settlement.

Highlighted

@tarbat wrote:

@Tyler_Durden, if you go to mediation, it’s worth thinking about what compromise, if any, you’d accept. If Currys insist on a reduced refund based on your 2 years of use, argue that the TV was expected to last at least 10 years.  That’s based on the no-burn-in guarantee that was provided on the KS TVs. Of course only you can decide if you’re open to a compromise settlement.


Again you could also argue that you have not had full use of your telly as it was advertised for the entire time you have owned it and feel that you should be compensated for the disappointment of not being able to enjoy using the Smart Internet off things through your telly as per their advert, which they acknowledge was on their website and was also heavily pushed by Samsung as well with their promotional advertising.

Highlighted

@paul1277 wrote:

@tarbat wrote:

@Tyler_Durden wrote:

My argument is that I was patiently waiting while the dongle was delayed. Once the announcment came in July 2018 that the dongle would not be supplied I began my claim wihin 30 days of the annoucment. 


Be ready for the argument that you should have asked the retailer about the missing dongle earlier, rather than relying on statements on twitter and in this forum by a third party (Samsung).


I see that as a possible  issue but,  civil court is about what is reasonable and I think you should be able to show it is not unreasonable to rely on statements from the manufacturer as to when the dongle would be made available.  You can show this was a correct decision as it was from the moderator on this forum who informed us that the dongle would not be made available, not the retailers, and that was only a few months back. 


Hey Paul, do you have a link to this announcement?

Top Liked Authors