Sunday Times to investigate OLED Screen Burn Issues
- Thread starter OLED Screen Burn
- Start date
An update on my dispute with John Lewis. I had an interesting call back from a more senior manager at John Lewis initially offering £100 towards the (once only) £200 LG panel replacement. I explained that I expected the screen burn to just reoccur with a replacement so I rejected this and requested a refund. To my surprise I was then offered a replacement (2020 model) LG OLED TV (Model 55CX5LB) or the cost of this towards an alternative TV. This was £1185 which seemed a steep step up from £100!
My original B6 was £1899 back in 2016 but, given the offered set was a better replacement, I accepted the refund as I believe the small claims court would have made a deduction for the use I'd had so far. John Lewis also collected my old set and returned it to LG which was fine with me.
I can't explain the change of heart from John Lewis. Jill from the Sunday Times had not yet contacted them, so either someone saw these posts or they just had a change of heart, which based on the previous calls I would doubt.
Jill did said she will obviously no longer be following up on my case but would check any other reported cases to see if she could take another case forward. So I can only urge anyone who still needs help with John Lewis or another retailer on the screen burn issues to send her an email.
My original B6 was £1899 back in 2016 but, given the offered set was a better replacement, I accepted the refund as I believe the small claims court would have made a deduction for the use I'd had so far. John Lewis also collected my old set and returned it to LG which was fine with me.
I can't explain the change of heart from John Lewis. Jill from the Sunday Times had not yet contacted them, so either someone saw these posts or they just had a change of heart, which based on the previous calls I would doubt.
Jill did said she will obviously no longer be following up on my case but would check any other reported cases to see if she could take another case forward. So I can only urge anyone who still needs help with John Lewis or another retailer on the screen burn issues to send her an email.
They probably don't want to set a precedent. They can say they offered you a refund for good faith/customer service/discretionary, not because there's a known problem with the technology that will affect plenty of people that they would then have to automatically refund.
I agree and to be honest I had not expected them to change their position as I had many previous calls and emails on this topic with them. I guess it got escalated high enough that someone could make a decision on closing the issue. All I can recommend is to persevere with your claim until they give in - they know this is a product problem.
Soldato
Finally had very respond to me after I sent my screen burn reference number from LG to them ( although I had to phone them to chase it up ).
They offered me a refund….. but @ 20% off per year usage ( so 60% ). Told them they were having a laugh and shall be sending my first legal letter ASAP ( already sent ).
Considering they’ve had 2 years of interest payments as well, I’ve threatened in the letter I’ll be claiming that back as well if not resolved.
The wait begins……
They offered me a refund….. but @ 20% off per year usage ( so 60% ). Told them they were having a laugh and shall be sending my first legal letter ASAP ( already sent ).
Considering they’ve had 2 years of interest payments as well, I’ve threatened in the letter I’ll be claiming that back as well if not resolved.
The wait begins……
Soldato
I doubt I will. LG have already admitted it’s faulty.
ive gone down this route before with the Xbox. They can’t afford to risk me winning as it sets a legal precedent. LG will probably pay them off to settle.
Got to love this bit from the email…..
If a refund or return is authorized, after we have received the report, then we will need to charge you 20% usage fee of the item as you have had the item for more one year.
“ 0 - 12 Months = Warranty Period
13 - 24 Months = 20% Usage Charge
25 - 36 Months = 40% Usage Charge
37 - 48 Months = 60% Usage Charge
49 - 60 Months = 80% Usage Charge
61 - 72 Months = 100% Usage Charge (No Refund Applicable). “
On top of the interest I’ve been paying the last 2 years……I don’t think so …
Last edited:
Caporegime
I would probably avoid the interest thing, I mean it's your own choice to purchase the TV on finance rather than outright and there must have been options for 0% elsewhere?
On the other hand, it would be interesting to see if you could really take it to them and get the lot back.
On the other hand, it would be interesting to see if you could really take it to them and get the lot back.
Soldato
Yeah it’s an interesting one. If it had been bought outright a full refund / replacement is the usual outcome if you are prepared to push it.
But what peeved me off is they are trying to reduce my refund AND still want the interest. I might have let the interest go…. But I’m pushing for it now.
There are some things maths cannot answer!What happens from 73 months onwards?
120% Usage charge and you have to pay them?
Well done to the OP. This whole issue is of course why I keep looking at OLED and dismissing them (as a monitor). My old Samsung Galaxy S5 still has a perfect screen without any burn in after all these years though.
Caporegime
So if my LG BX gets any screen burn (can't see any yet after a year), could I in theory complain and get a replacement even if I haven't taken any cover out on the TV?
Caporegime
You could but you may have to push it for months on end.
Soldato
3 legal letter each 14 working days apart is the short answer. They tend to settle when the 3rd comes as you can then sue in small claims.
Soldato
An update on my Very legal process for my LG screen burn issue… They respond on my 2nd letter…..
But all they said was sorry I’m not happy on the 60% usage charge and they are within consumer rights act ( can’t see how ).
And any queries call them…. No budge on upping an offer .
Now I’m assuming I can now send my third legal letter earlier than the normal required time as they have replied ?
But all they said was sorry I’m not happy on the 60% usage charge and they are within consumer rights act ( can’t see how ).
And any queries call them…. No budge on upping an offer .
Now I’m assuming I can now send my third legal letter earlier than the normal required time as they have replied ?
I have a different view to @Ayahuasca on the interest.
I think of interest-bearing finance as a tool. It enabled you to make a purchase that you might not have done otherwise because the cash wasn't available. For this reason, the credit provider shoulders some responsibility for you owning the goods that you now find "are not fit for purpose"; the argument being that had the retailer not provided a rent-to-buy option then you would not have purchased.
This is a very similar argument to credit card purchases. There are additional protections in place for the consumer against the credit card companies for exactly this reason.
Investigate further at https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.../consumer-credit/goods-services-bought-credit
Soldato
I don’t want to drag this out tbh… I was considering a counter offer of I keep the tv , with the 60% usage applied ( they’ve had 2 years interest at silly money anyway) …. Atm they want take the tv back if I accept….which is nuts, and I pay to fix it myself.
Oled has an inherent fault so I’m paying to fix an issue that could happen again.