Dear Claudienne,

On September 12, 2015, my husband and I purchased a Blackpoint Smart TV, model # BP49SMT, Serial #1410087M00167 at a store downtown Kingston. On January 16, 2016, I noticed that the television started turning off on its own. This television was purchased for $62, 000.00. It kept turning off between 10 and 20 minutes after being turned on or restarted.

On Saturday January 23, we returned to the store with the television and explained to the proprietor what the problem was. He turned on the television, made some checks and informed us that nothing was wrong with it. He indicated that it was a user problem and instructed us to take the TV and go. We complied. We turned on the TV upon reaching home, and the same problem kept recurring. By then it was too late in the evening to return to the store.

On Monday January 25, we took the television back to the store, and the proprietor informed us that it would have to be left overnight for the technicians to determine the “nature” of the problem. I returned to the store the following day, and the owner of the store told me in a very rude and disrespectful manner that the television was still being worked on and I should come back in a week for it.

I reported the matter to a police inspector at the City Centre Police Station, and he accompanied me back to the store. The proprietor assured the inspector that everything would be dealt with within a week. The inspector advised me to contact the Consumer Affairs Commission (CAC).

When I complained to the CAC, the officer there told me that by attempting to repair the equipment, the owner of the store was operating within the terms of the agreement and there was nothing that the CAC could “do at the time”. When my wife and I enquired if the repairs had to be done within a specific period, she indicated that there was no specific time frame. I told her that I could not wait indefinitely for the repairs to be done.

After a week of waiting, we returned to the store on Tuesday February 2 and were presented with the television that the proprietor claimed had been repaired. On close inspection of the TV, however, we observed several scratches, noticed that screws were missing, and that it had a loose panel. It was obvious to us that it was not our television, but an old used unit.

We also observed that the serial number on that TV was different from the one on the unit we had purchased. We pointed out these discrepancies and left the TV at the store.

We told the police inspector and the CAC officer what had transpired, and they promised to speak to the proprietor. However, the CAC officer said that nothing could be done as the store owner was trying to repair the unit. He had also told her that he had no more TVs of that model in stock.

On February 15, we lodged a complaint with the Fair Trading Commission after the CAC officer told us that there was nothing else that the Commission could do since the store owner said he was repairing the equipment. One month has passed and we have not received a favourable response from the Fair Trading Commission. We do not know what else to do.

On Tuesday February 16, the store owner told us to visit another branch to collect a replacement television since he no longer had the model that we had purchased. We visited the store on Thursday of the same week and he told us to choose a television.

The only television that was comparable in size to the one we had purchased was a 50-inch Samsung Smart TV, and we selected same. To our shock and dismay, he proceeded to quote a price of $140,000.00 and indicated that we should pay the difference in the purchase price for the television we had originally bought. We refused, indicating that this option was unacceptable, and stated that we would not pay any money for a replacement television.

I called the CAC officer and related what had transpired. I also expressed my dissatisfaction with the owner’s offensive behaviour. No action was taken or instruction given by the CAC.

When the problem was initially brought to the proprietor’s attention in January, we had requested either an immediate replacement of the television or a refund, but he had flatly refused, stating that his policy was to repair and return the purchased equipment.

When we contacted the CAC officer, she indicated that there was nothing the Commission could do, as in her opinion the proprietor was operating within the warranty obligation.

From January 25 until today (March 14, 2016) , we have been attempting to have the proprietor abide by his Warranty Obligation of (a) repairing and returning the equipment in a reasonable time, or (b) replacing the item at no extra cost to us, or (c) refunding the full payment.

He has refused to fulfil any of these obligations.

I am now seeking your assistance in having this matter resolved.

DH

Dear DH,

Tell Claudienne made the CEO of the CAC aware of your problem and she immediately contacted the officer and worked closely with her to have your matter resolved.

You have advised us that shortly after your discussion with us, the CAC officer called you on Monday March 21 and said that you should collect a television at the store of the proprietor. However, you informed us as follows:“The CAC CEO eventually advisedWe subsequently received an e-mail from you which stated: “All the best.

You have advised us that shortly after your discussion with us, the CAC officer called you on Monday March 21 and said that you should collect a television at the store of the proprietor. However, you informed us as follows:

“

When we went to the store, he presented us with a TV of a different brand from the one we had purchased. We pointed out to him that it was a different brand from the one we had purchased and that we were not familiar with that brand.

We left the store without taking the television and called the CAC officer and informed her of what hadhappened again.

Based on an earlier conversation with the proprietor in which he indicated that he could not and would not give us a different brand television as a replacement, we found it strange that he was now, in his own words, “giving us a bigger, better model”.

We took it upon ourselves to get some information about this brand – Imperial. An internet search revealed no information whatsoever on this brand, an indication that it was not a mainstream/ popular brand. As such, we could not determine the history or reliability of this product.

We also visited some stores downtown and made enquiries about this television and were told that the brand is new out of China and that it is currently the cheapest television on the market. Several stores quoted prices of $55,000 – $60,000 for this 48-inch model (IMP50SMT).

It should be noted that this is less than we paid for our television, and this (i.e. size, cost and brand) brings into question the integrity of the proprietor, which has been an issue over and over again.”

The CAC CEO eventually advised

Tell Claudienne that the proprietor had managed to find a new Blackpoint Smart TV of the same model to replace your TV, and we note that you collected it on March 30, 2016.

We subsequently received an e-mail from you which stated: “

Thank you very much for your assistance in resolving the matter that was presented to you (after not receiving any favourable result from our initial contact with the CAC).

We appreciate your intervention, which has resulted in the television being replaced with a new one. Thank you very much again, and please continue your good work.”

We hope that the new television will perform satisfactorily.

All the best.

Have a problem with a store, utility, a company? Telephone 936-9436 or write to: Tell Claudienne c/o Sunday Finance, Jamaica Observer, 40-42 1/2 Beechwood Avenue, Kingston 5; or e-mail: edwardsc@jamaicaobserver.com. Please include a contact phone number.