Hello Sally,
Another fairly typical defence from a DSG Retail outlet so nothing special there.
I will go through each point for you.
Quote:
1. The defendants admits supplying the claimant with a hewlett packard laptop computer under contract of sale date 30th Jan 2007. The purchase price was £620.97
This just sets out the facts so nothing to worry about here.
Quote:
2. The goods were provided with a twelve-months guarantee covering parts and labout but which excludes damage caused by accident, misuse or neglect.
Where does it state in your report that there is any damage?
In fact, it specifically states:-
Quote:
The laptop arrived in excellent condition and it was immediately evident the customer had taken care of it.
There was no evidence externally of any damage to the laptop.
Whilst they have not specifically stated that the fault was caused by neglect or misuse or accident they have however made reference to it so I feel that this needs to be responded to.
Quote:
3. The defendent avers the claiment contacted then in or around Jan 2010, stating he was dissatisfield with the operation of the goods. Specifically stating that the NVIDIA chip card was causing problems.
Well, firstly you are a she not a he as they incorrectly state. Furthermore didn't you tell them that the Nvidia card was inherently defective rather than just "causing problems"?
Quote:
4. The defendant avers that the claimant requested that the goods be replaced/ repaired without the use of the specific part or a full refund.
Do you think they drunk when they wrote that line?
I think that what they are trying to say is that you had requested the part number of the mainboard that they were going to use to repair your laptop. You had also requested a guarantee that the replacement part would be 100% free from the Nvidia defect. You told them that unless they could guarantee that the part they would use would be free from the defect then you would want a refund.
There was nothing wrong with your very reasonable request.
Quote:
5. The Defendent avers the claimant sent an independent engineers report to them detailling the fault and likely cause.
The report actually details the inherent defect and the fact that the laptop was doomed to fail prematurely.
Quote:
6. The defendants aver they deemed the goods could be repaired under a fixed cost repair, which would be guaranteed for 3 months, the claimant did not respond to this offer.
On page 3 of this thread you stated that you had taken your laptop down to their store and:-
Quote:
I knew what was coming the offer of a free repair!!!!! to which I asked for the guarantee it was free from the defect etc as you have advised. 90 days was what she offered me and when I asked what we happen if in 90 days it failed she said I could go through the same process again! WOW how kind of them. I said I had to think about it and get back to her.
So it is not true when they claim that you did not respond to their offer. Their offer was refused because they could not guarantee that the replacement board would not be inherently defective.
Quote:
7. The defendants aver they also offered the claimant a sum which takes into consideration the age and usage of the goods. To date they have not received a response.
Another untruth. I have read through your entire thread and at no time have they offered you a refund - reduced for usage or otherwise.
Where is their evidence of such an offer?
Quote:
8. The defendant will contend and aver that, in retaining the goods the claimant has accepted them by virtue of section 35(4) of the sales of goods act 1979 (as amended) He has retained the goods by keeping them after the lapse of a resonable period of time without rejecting them.
Not quite true this.
As soon as you realised that your laptop was inherently defective you immediately notified the retailer. You could not notify them any sooner as the problem had not manifested itself at that time. Even if you had had your suspicions prior to the failure and had reported them to Curry's, there is little chance they would have done anything as they would contend that your laptop was working.
The time it takes for the defect to manifest itself can be 14 months or more, depending on whether the user is a light or heavy user.
Besides, the customer has six years to take action when the goods in question are inherently defective.
Quote:
9. The defendant further relies on the decision in Jones v Gallagher (2004) EWCA in respect to acceptance. In this case despite defects that were patent the learned district Judge sitting at Wrexham found that a Kitchen costing £8000 had been accepted by the time the Claimants attemptedto reject which was just 5 months after purchase. Buxton and Thomas LJJ upheld the District Judges decision on Appeal. The Defendants aver that the claimants own admission she has retained the goods for a period of 36 months without rejecting them.
How scandalous of them to use something like this in a small claims court but no problems.
I checked out the case of Jones Vs Gallagher (2004) and the thing that they failed to mention was that Mr & Mrs Jones (The Claimants) were fully aware of the defects in the kitchen and continued to use it for seven months knowing these defects existed.
You did not know, at any time, that your laptop was inherently defective so the two cases are entirely different.
Note that they say:-
Quote:
In this case despite defects that were patent.....
That should read:- "In this case despite defects that were patently obvious....."
Your case and their reference to Jones Vs Gallagher are totally different.
What they failed to mention was that whilst the court ruled that Mr & Mrs Jones had lost the right to reject the kitchen he did however award them £2,500 in damages.
Quote:
10. The defendants contends that under section 11 (4) of the sales of goods act 1979 (as amended) a claimant who has lost the right to reject goods can only treat any breach he may prove as a breach of warranty.
Again, see answer at point 8 above.
Quote:
11. Accordingly, the defendant denies that the claimant is entitled to reject the goods to recover the purchase price or that he is entitled to damages at all.
Ok, so what are they saying here?
That they can sell you a laptop that was doomed to fail prematurely from the date you parted with your hard earned cash and then just say "sorry, you are out of warranty, see you later"
If HP and DSG Retail had been upfront about the problems that existed in these laptops then you could have returned the laptop back to them much sooner than you did.
You certainly are entitled to either a refund or a replacement laptop as a repair is out of the question.
Quote:
10. The defendants contends that under section 11 (4) of the sales of goods act 1979 (as amended) a claimant who has lost the right to reject goods can only treat any breach he may prove as a breach of warranty.
In your case this is not a case of breach of warranty but a breach of the Sale Of Goods Act and a breach of your Statutory Rights.
What really annoys me is the fact that they totally disregarded this part of your report:-
Quote:
At idle the temperature of the GPU reached 103°C
Running a DVD the temperature reached a dangerous 135°C before we terminated the tests.
You were very lucky you didn't suffer burns from using the laptop.
Did they also overlook the part of your report that states:-
Quote:
DUE TO THE TEMPERATURES REACHED THIS LAPTOP IS A FIRE HAZZARD AND COULD ALSO BE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS TO THE CUSTOMERS HEALTH AND SAFETY.
I would also state that the customer was very lucky she was not injured whilst using this laptop under such extreme temperatures.
Do they still think it is worth their while using a board which could potentially be as inherently defective as your board so patently is?
Quote:
12. Save as is hereinbefore specifically admitted or not admitted the defendant denies each and every allegation contained in this statement of claims as though the same were herein set forth and traversed seriatim.
This is just legal mumbo jumbo.
So Sally, whilst they may have listed 12 defence points they have not really entered a defence to the fact that:-
1) They sold you a laptop that was doomed to fail prematurely
2) They sold you an inherently defective laptop
3) They sold you a laptop that reached temperatures that could have burnt you or damaged your furniture.
4) They slandered myself and my company when they said:-
Quote:
.......BUT! the interesting part, I asked if she could confirm that they had recieved my report as when I called on Monday a rude man told me that you had not. She checked for me and she replied with "OH! yes we have it. It's from lapcure now can I just advise that you don't use that company or have any involvement with them as our company are having a great deal of problems with them" When I asked her what kind of problems she said she wasn't really sure but bogus reports and stuff. I said it was my legal right to have an independent engineers report from whom ever I choose and she agreed but said that Lapcure is not recommended.
That was absolutely scandalous for them to say that and just shows the levels that they will stoop in order to try and remove or reduce your rights.
What is also very interesting is when you said:-
Quote:
I contacted Currys after calling trading standards about my rights. When I contacted them they informed me it was out of warranty so I would need to contact HP with this problem.
When I informed him that that was incorrect and that I am in a customer agreement with Currys not HP he then passed me over to his manager. He then informed me that after they found out that HP were selling laptops with faulty parts they stopped selling them which was before I bought mine, and only started selling them again when they were of a high quality again.
Mine is supposedly one of the 'high quality' laptops and assured me that mine is not inherently faulty in any way and it is a chargable repair as it is out of warranty. I did not believe a word of this so continued to look for more evidence to support my case which was when I came across this forum.
Not only have they given you factually incorrect information there but they have also made a huge admission.
They said:-
Quote:
He then informed me that after they found out that HP were selling laptops with faulty parts they stopped selling them which was before I bought mine, and only started selling them again when they were of a high quality again.
This means that they have admitted to selling "laptops with faulty parts"
As the defect affects virtually all of the models of the Nvidia GPU's and the chips were all manufactured at roughly the same time (2007/2008) then I would like to know where they managed to source these new "high quality" laptops.
But then by definition are they saying that the laptops that they were selling previously a lower quality laptop?
I would start to get a file of evidence together Sally.
There are loads of links here:-
evidence-with-links-to-external-sites-t10.htmland here:-
dozens-of-links-of-evidence-very-helpful-information-t237.htmlThis document would also serve as good evidence:-
nufi-vs-nvidia-document-1-of-court-filing-t396.htmlAs would this:-
nvidia-form-10k-filing-t416.htmlAnd this, which is a transcript of an interview the CEO of Nvidia gave recently:-
topic362.htmlI am more than happy to help you further Sally and we should make sure that we can hit the courts with loads of dynamite evidence - just in case Curry's are foolish enough to attend court.
I think it would also be worth you while contacting your local newspaper and tell them about your laptop, the temperatures it is reaching, the Nvidia defect and the battle you are having with Curry's.
You might get a mention in the papers but you would also be able to highlight your case to others who may be in a similar situation.
Good luck Sally, if you need any help or advice then please just let me know.
Best wishes
Paul
The Admin Team
Login
Register
Newsletters
FAQ
Search
Views: 4207
Favorites: 0
Followers: 0
complete joke! 
