Long story short, purchased a high end laptop for my son with three year warranty, motherboard failed outside of warranty so paid for the repair at a cost of £183. Their terms and conditions state, "7 Warranty 7.1 In addition to any warranty that you may have purchased with your Goods, all Goods that we supply are warranted free from defects for 12 months from the date of supply. This warranty does not affect your statutory rights as a consumer.", PCS now claim that that the "warranted free from defects for 12 months" is actually capped at three months unless otherwise stated so will not cover the cost of second motherboard. They are demanding £227 and claim that the melted chasis caused by the defective motherboard is Customer Induced Damage so would not be covered either way. Isn't capping the defect warranty ambiguous when it previously states in their terms that all goods supplied are covered for 12 months from the date of purchase?? Where do i stand on getting the repair done as i do not want to pay out another £227 after having just bought a mother board and my son urgently needs the laptop back for uni work
still waiting for them to answer that one
Just so we're clear...
You bought a computer that came with a supplier's 3 year warranty in addition to your statutory rights.
The motherboard failed after the 3 year warranty had expired.
You paid the supplier to replace the motherboard, but the supplier wants you to pay for the new board that was fitted - is that the situation?
The melted chassis - it's what is called consequential damage. It resulted, or so you say in your first post, from the defective motherboard.
So I know exactly what the situation is, please tell me how old the machine was when the motherboard failed.
Have you asked the supplier to explain how the chassis damage can have been customer induced, when it resulted from the failure of the motherboard?
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.