Indesit Repair Plain
Your undated letter addressed to me titled ‘Restore your Peace of Mind’ and received by me in the past few days refers. I write this letter with much hesitation as past attempts to communicate with your so-called ‘customer services’ department have lead me to perceive that not only are channels of communication with your company both inefficient and seemingly obstructed by yourselves, but there is a dearth of employees within it either willing to listen or capable of understanding the tenure of simple logic.
Your letter is couched as an offer to ‘restore’ (my) ‘peace of mind’ by offering a renewal of a since defunct repair plan. It is gratifying to see that electric appliance manufacturers are diversifying their business to include the general provision of psychological and emotional wellbeing to their customers and the public at large. However not only does my past experience with your company engender me with severe doubts about its ability and willingness to perform its traditional business of appliance repair but almost certainly convinces me that your company will fail utterly to promote or inspire psychological tranquillity in me should I renew any repair plan.
Apart from the names and addresses much of your letter is hopelessly untrue. The assertion ‘restore your peace of mind’ is untrue. The previous plan gave me anything but peace of mind. There is no desire on my part to hostage my peace of mind to you or to have the state of mind I experienced when under your ‘care’ in the past restored to me.
Your letter contains an offer to look after my poor ageing fridge freezer against the potential perils of the coming twelve months. The difficulty with that contention is that the fridge did not work from the date we first called to enquire about repairs, over three years ago, until such time that we got rid of it because it did not work and had not been repaired at all. It may have been rescued from the municipal dump or recycled but to the best of my knowledge it has not worked properly since it broke down prior to our contacting your company.
When the appliance broke down originally, in about June 2008(?) I called your company. I was offered a choice of a one off fee for the repair or to take a repair plan at monthly amounts. I opted for the latter course. There was no mention of peace of mind at that stage, but there was mention of potential for your company to replace the appliance if unable to repair it. There also appeared to be an undertaking to repair it.
The first disquiet we experienced was the delay of several days we were told to expect until the available engineer could attend to assess the situation and then the potential further delay till a further appointment could be made and any necessary parts ordered for actual repairs to be carried out. Naturally the prospect of ten days to two weeks until we had a working fridge freezer was not overly conducive of peace of mind to a family of six. However we accepted the fact and let matters take their course.
The engineer came, for the first time and quickly formed the view that a particular part was in need of replacement. That was approximately 21 June of that year. The part was duly ordered and the appointment made for about a week later when the engineer returned. He was admitted to the house by the cleaner. I saw him briefly during a short trip home but when I returned later on he had left the premises. The appliance was not on and a few parts removed from it were abandoned on my kitchen table. There was no indication or communication from him or anyone else on your behalf as to where he had gone or why. I managed after much delay to reach a ‘customer adviser’ on your alleged customer services’ line and was then informed that another part was needed and had been ordered and another appointment had been made for a future date, with no consideration of its convenience to us at all. Of course over these weeks we had no operating fridge freezer and relied on limited availability in the appliances of various kind neighbours whose forbearance was waning. This further made relaxation and peace of mind an elusive possibility.
The next appointed date arrived and the engineer returned and did some work on the fridge freezer. He left us with the machine now apparently working. However within hours it was blatantly obvious to us that the appliance, while apparently working and whirring away was not actually cold or capable of getting cold.
Again attempts to reach ‘customer services’ were frustrating but eventually successful. There was no sympathy to a plea for expedited treatment in light of the weeks we had undergone without a fridge or peace of mind. A new date and time was allotted. This date was over six weeks after the initial call.
On that that and during the appointed time the engineer failed to come or to make contact with us. Frustrated with the utter failure of your company to effect a repair, combined with the difficulty in getting through to ‘customer services’ and the lack of sympathy or ability to get anything done I cancelled the direct debit with my bank. The appliance sat idle in our kitchen while we obtained a second hand fridge freezer that worked (and still does so in our kitchen). I despaired (quite rightly as matters turned out) of ever getting a satisfactory response from yourselves and felt it not worth the effort to communicate with you further.
Several months later I received a letter of demand from your selves claiming payment (approximately eighty six pounds if my memory serves me correctly) in respect of a repair to a fridge freezer allegedly carried out at our home address on the date of the occasion of either the first or second visit by your engineer. It made no reference to the non-visit of the last appointment or any other visits, nor did it mention the existing repair plan.
It is this letter that made me realise your company’s utter incompetence further. You had made a demand for a repair allegedly performed on an occasion where you had not at all, nor according to your own records, actually performed a repair. Were you to have sued me in court on the basis of that letter you could not possibly have succeeded, as it was clear from all records that the fridge was not working immediately after that visit. Had you attempted to sue me or make demand under the terms of the repair plan, something you did not attempt to do, and in terms of which I was to pay your company the balance of the agreed price of the repair plan, I would have still had a good defence. I would have been able to show that I was in possession of a non-repaired fridge.
Subsequent to the receipt of this letter I had, again after long delays, a most unsatisfactory and unpleasant telephone call with some allegedly more senior person in your ‘customer services.’ This person was not merely rude to me but made unfounded allegations of dishonesty and prevarication against me. She also showed an inept grasp of the legal consequences of the matter. Her basic ‘logic’ (for want of as better phrase) was that the appliance had been repaired and I was merely attempting to avoid paying. She could not appreciate the fact that on the date it was claimed you had effected repairs no repairs had been done. She did not seem to accept that no proper repair had in fact been completed on any of the visits and that the machine was sitting idly in my kitchen till that date and beyond. As regards the last appointment date during which time I was home, she had a record that your engineer reported ‘no one at home’ for that date. This led to your representative adopting the line that since this ‘fact’ was logged in the engineer’s report it was inevitably true. Therefore the appliance must have been working, having been repaired on an earlier occasion by the engineer I had not paid because I wanted to avoid doing so and had not contacted your company earlier because, as she put it more than once ‘you wasn’t home.’
The allegation that ‘you wasn’t home’ was simply untrue. The insinuation that it was me, who had actually been home (which must be true according to her logic because it is logged as such in this letter) was lying was insulting, inappropriate and not conducive to a belief that your company can provide peace of mind. Your engineer had gained entry to our home on each and every prior occasion and had he made any proper attempt to alert me to his presence on the date of the last. Whether he is a liar, an anti-Semite or why he says there was no one home I do not know. The insinuation that six weeks of being messed about by a mixture of red tape and thorough incompetence was irrelevant and that my sole motivation was to avoid paying a legitimate debt was laughable.
Notwithstanding the very solid moral and legal position we decided to pay the money you claimed rather than to fight you in court. While I have no doubt whatsoever that any competent court would have dismissed any claim you made, for our peace of mind we wished to be rid of you.
Please do not send us any further untrue and dishonest solicitations for your business, or any other offer of business. This letter will be published in a public forum.
write a comment