Posted on 12/04/2016 13:16
Panasonic are refusing to repair an £800 t v because the owners smoke 
Now I am not a smoker( detest it ,) we have friends and relatives who smoke, just because they choose to smoke doesn't mean they are bad or careless people
I have never seen signs or had a salesman ask us if we smoke and inform us if we do then your not covered by the extended warranty on your t v
Posted on 12/04/2016 21:41
Having been involved in the electrical trade during my career its certainly a new one on me but technology has probably moved on a lot since then. However if Panasonic can prove that smoke/nicotine is causing the issue they have a right to refuse to repair under warranty as its self inflicted.
David
Surely if what you say is true David , then the customer should be made aware of the no smoking clause on purchase or should be included in the contract document.
Write your comments here...exactly what I was saying in previous post hosta Surely every one should be told
Posted on 12/04/2016 22:29
Having been involved in the electrical trade during my career its certainly a new one on me but technology has probably moved on a lot since then. However if Panasonic can prove that smoke/nicotine is causing the issue they have a right to refuse to repair under warranty as its self inflicted.
David
Surely if what you say is true David , then the customer should be made aware of the no smoking clause on purchase or should be included in the contract document.
Do we know that Panasonic don't say something about environmental polution and how it might cause problems? One of the big issues these days is that when you buy something like the a TV you have to go online for a full instruction manual but many make do with the quick start guide. The person concerned claims they both smoke 20 a day how do we know if that is an under estimation. Would they have stopped smoking if they had realised it was a problem? People can't escape their own responsibilities.
David
Posted on 18/04/2016 15:56
As an ex service engineer, tar deposit from smoke has corrosive, insulating, and light masking properties, and can play havoc with electrical and optical components
So if the fault itself was caused by the people smoking, then the item is not faulty
Why should Panasonic take responsibility, if the fault was caused by the smokers
Posted on 18/04/2016 17:29
As mentioned before, it is not IF the nicotine did the damage, but whether Panasonic should have alerted their purchasers to the get out clause (if there is one.) Otherwise it could be said that they were negligent in not advising customers to refrain from smoking. Could it be said that they had built a TV set that was 'Not fit for purpose', bearing in mind that it is perfectly legal to smoke in one's own home?
Posted on 18/04/2016 18:24
As mentioned before, it is not IF the nicotine did the damage, but whether Panasonic should have alerted their purchasers to the get out clause (if there is one.) Otherwise it could be said that they were negligent in not advising customers to refrain from smoking. Could it be said that they had built a TV set that was 'Not fit for purpose', bearing in mind that it is perfectly legal to smoke in one's own home?
And possibly in front of a TV that's not made by Panasonic !
Posted on 19/04/2016 07:29
No get our clause need, unless you view statutory consumer law as a get out clause .
The fault was caused by a third party, and outside factors, which Panasonic , or any other manufacturer has no control over. The fault was not a manufacturing fault, the fault was caused by the direct actions, of the purchaser.
Rubytuesday
Motorhomer