Should i accept this?

[ticktock]

Pity you didn't return it straight away!

 

[str]

I'm almost positive you are wrong, it gives you recompance if the item is not sold as described or is not fit for purpose. If they state the dead pixel policy in the contract of sale then you have accepted this as the product description. Also, it's called the Sales of Goods Act.

You can, however, return it under the DSR regs, but you'll probably have to pay for return postage.

If the OP is a consumer then maybe the following will change your opinion from almost positive to not really sure?

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) says that goods should be as follows:

* Of satisfactory quality.

This means the goods must meet the standards that any reasonable person would expect, taking into account the description, the price and all other relevant information. In some circumstances, the retailer may be liable for any statement made by the manufacturer about the goods.

Satisfactory quality includes the appearance and finish of the goods, their safety and durability and whether they are free from defects (including minor faults)

* Fit for the purpose

that goods of this type are generally sold. They must also be fit for any specific or particular purpose made known to the seller at the time of the agreement.

The OP appears to be suggesting that the dead pixels are more than minor faults but even if they were considered minor faults his statutary rights give him the right to consider the monitor as not of satisfactory quality.

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCRs)

As a consumer, you are protected against unfair standard terms in contracts you make with traders by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCRs).

The UTCCRs can protect you from terms that reduce your statutory or common law rights and from terms that seek to impose unfair burdens on you over and above the ordinary rules of law.

An unfair term in a contract covered by the UTCCRs is not binding on you.

Unfair contract terms - you are not bound by standard terms that unfairly favour the trader. Terms and conditions that appear to exclude or limit your liability for faulty or poorly-described goods or for consequential loss are not fair. Not only are unfair terms misleading, they are also unenforceable in the courts. See Unfair terms in contracts for more information.

I am of the opinion that the OP is describing what could very easily be described as a faulty monitor and any terms in the T&Cs which attempt to convey otherwise are more than likely unfair terms and therefore not legally binding on a consumer.

I suspect the majority of consumers consider dead pixels as being "tolerable" because they have little understanding or knowledge of their rights as a consumer and they don't know that there are authorities who will ensure our consumer rights are upheld.

It's like monitor manufacturers have added dead pixel tolerances to their T&Cs or spread the scary notion that monitors would be a lot more expensive if they had to be replaced after developing a dead pixel because they know that the majority of consumers will blindly believe it is within the law or that they will be out of pocket should it be proven otherwise.

It looks crystal clear to me but of course I could be completely wrong.

 

[Dual]

I had rang overclockers today, and they explained that it would take about the same amount of time as they would have to contact samsung anyways .

So i rang back Samsung this time i spoke to muhammed , explained the situation and he asked security informations , and my reference.

And someone will call within 5 days to arrage an exchange, they will come to the door and pickup the old monitor and swap it then.

-Dual

 

[Hutch]

Thats pretty good i reckon.. Lots of manufacturers get bitchy about dead pixels

 

[Sankari]

Good old Muhammed came through for you in the end!

 

[Deleted member 2277]

I had rang overclockers today, and they explained that it would take about the same amount of time as they would have to contact samsung anyways .

So i rang back Samsung this time i spoke to muhammed , explained the situation and he asked security informations , and my reference.

And someone will call within 5 days to arrage an exchange, they will come to the door and pickup the old monitor and swap it then.

-Dual

But are they exchanging it for a new one or a refurbished one?

 

[Dual]

replacement

Erm, It came today while i was at work, it seems that they havn't replaced it with a new or refurbished one, the buttons are hanging off, broken pieces of plastic in the bag(not sure where from yet), the back panel clip is broke to it only has 1 clip which will hold it on, and there are scratches all over it... wtf I'll post pictures when im home
sorry for image quality

are the guys at Samsung playing a joke on me? i paid £300 and they replace a faulty screen with a broken screen?

scrathes


buttons


buttons again


new screen extras


just some more scratches




Well atleast i don't have any dead pixels as far as i can see

I'll rang them back and they said someone will call me, im going to ring them again see if i can get through to the I.T department.

 

[jmhduck]

Erm, it came today while i was at work, it seems that they havn't replaced it with a new or refurbished one, the buttons are hanging off, broken pieces of plastic in the bag(not sure where from yet), the back panel clip is broke to it only has 1 clip which will hold it on, and there are scratches all over it... wtf I'll post pictures when im home

ROFL . I feel your pain dude must be a pain in the posterior but that just made me laugh

 

[Sel]

Have there been any developments in this story?

 

[Dual]

atlast



After talking to both samsung and ocuk, me mum rang back i was ill Thursday rang samsung back and they said sorry even if i was to get a reconditioned screen it shouldn't look anything like that. Also they said it was probably a smashed and bashed on the way to exchange with me.

I explained that i only had purchased one a couple of weeks ago and they said they will make sure they get the best conditioned one.

When i rang Samsung, they said they could replace it they didn't say reconditioned and OcUK said they could do it but they would have to ring Samsung anyway. So i thought well if Samsung would replace it i may as well do it through them as it would seem quicker than going through 2 people rather than 1.

But Samsung use the warranty if you ring them direct, which i didn't really know, as i thought they understood my situation.

The screen i have now doesn't seem reconditioned.. It may well be but
dead pixel count = 0

Oh and no broken bits

I am now satisfied with my screen and although the process may have been long it was well worth 4 annoying pixels to 0 dead.

-Dual

P.S Installing Crysis Warhead NOW

 

[ZedPowered]

Glad it is sorted, that is a bit of a **** take tho!

 

[Sel]

It's good that it's been sorted but it isn't right to be put through this hassle just to get what you paid for.

 

[nightmare99]

Dead pixel policy means nothing to the law , if it has a defect then you can demand a new unit or money back if you wish.

"If it has a defect" this is the issue, ISO state how many dead stuck pixels count as a defect its not down to what you personally feel is acceptable. Although the manufacturer/re/etailor should inform you of pixel standards at point of purchase.

 

[Tombo]

"If it has a defect" this is the issue, ISO state how many dead stuck pixels count as a defect its not down to what you personally feel is acceptable. Although the manufacturer/re/etailor should inform you of pixel standards at point of purchase.

Actually IIRC it is down to what you feel is acceptable as far as the law is concerned.

 

[philjohn]

Actually IIRC it is down to what you feel is acceptable as far as the law is concerned.

no it's not, it's down to what was stated in the terms and conditions of sale (which constitute your contract with the retailer). Whilst they cannot contain anything that restrict your statutory rights (or else they'd fall foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regs) they can state clearly that LCD's may contain duff pixels and they will only accept them as faulty over a certain threshold - if you had this information up-front when you made the purchase you are out of luck.

If you purchase over the internet though, you are covered by the DSR and can send stuff back quickly for any reason.

 

[CaptainCrash]

no it's not, it's down to what was stated in the terms and conditions of sale (which constitute your contract with the retailer). Whilst they cannot contain anything that restrict your statutory rights (or else they'd fall foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regs) they can state clearly that LCD's may contain duff pixels and they will only accept them as faulty over a certain threshold - if you had this information up-front when you made the purchase you are out of luck.

Do you know this for a fact (eg relevant case law), or is it simply your interpretation of the situation?

It seems hard to believe that a defect is not a defect under the SoGA, just because the supplier says it isn't. Are the ISO standards recognised in law for this purpose?