The TV has direct aerial connection for FreeView.
All other inputs - three HDMIs and one SCART - are connected to various sources - FreeSat, Virgin Cable and DVD players.
The problem, however is not related to any of thses inputs, only to the fact that a design change has robbed the TV of an audio output which works on all the other TVs in the house.
I should mention that, although I am long retired - being in my late 70s - I spent my entire working life in the electronics industry so I believe I have considered all the likely work arounds.
This is simply a question of whether such a design change renders a product 'unfit for purpose'. If so, I should be able to return it to the retailer and ask for a replacement which allows me to listen via the optical audio output while the family listens via the loudspeakers.
Thanks for trying, anyway.
I would have thought that this was a simple legal question. That is, if a product is not suitable for the stated purpose due to a design change which is not pointed out at the point of purchase, does the customer have the same right to return the goods as unsuitable for purpose as he would if he had simply been supplied with the wrong product? Manufacturers make changes to the specification of products all the time. This normally leads to improvements in the product. In this instance, the manufacturer has changed something which has featured traditionally in previous versions of the product. It was only upon getting the TV home and setting it up that the problem became apparent. According to the manufacturer's representative with whom I spoke, it has proved unpopular with a large number of customers.
It is not a fault in the design ‘per se’, but a change in the design which has the same effect that would be experienced had it been faulty. Does this give the customer the same legal rights that would apply if the goods had an inherent fault?
Sorry to be so long-winded but I feel it was necessary.
I'm sorry but I can't see the relevance of these questions.
I bought the TV in the local branch of Richer Sounds about six weeks ago and I paid for it with a credit card. I always do this because it gives me extra cover in case of a problem.
If the product had been faulty, I am aware of my rights under the Sale of Goods Act and would not have raised the question.
All I am asking is - if a design change presents a problem which, if it were a fault, would allow a claim to be made, do I have the same right to return the TV since the new design does not my requirements. The change was only discovered after I had bought the TV. Had I known that such a problem had now been designed in, I would not have bought the set.
Can I return the set under the Sale of Goods Act?