Who should cover cost of repair?

[Steve H]

RobinOakapple said:

Are you addressing that to the OP? It needs to be addressed to the person whose agent the courier is. And as the repairers are claiming that the new fault is because of a failed part, it's all irrelevant anyway.

The OP is the guy with the problem and the guy on this thread so yep, that's who I was commenting towards .

I covered the issue around a part failing through no fault in the first part of my post, it is only irrelevant if the repairers are correct in suggesting it was such a failure.

[singlecoil]

Steve H said:

The OP is the guy with the problem and the guy on this thread so yep, that's who I was commenting towards .

I expect RO will correct me if I'm wrong, but I reckon his point is that the OP doesn't have a contract with the courier but the sender does.

[Steve H]

Fair point I guess but since he does have a contract with the sender and the sender is unlikely to be working hard on blaming the courier so it's ultimately going to be down to the OP to show -

1) That it isn't a random failure that was going to happen anyway.
2) That the package was either poorly wrapped or mishandled.

If he can do both then it's up to the sender to decide if he is passing the buck on to the courier.

[RB Will]

Well everyone at the their end is singing off the same hymn sheet now, that its a part that wears out (though it has failed while not in use).
In doing so he did say that it was more likely to break when it did due to the instrument being worked on and shipped around.

They have offered 50% of the next service which amounts to about £900.

May as well just take that as I dont know how I'm going to get anywhere arguing against the experts in the equipment saying its just something that happens.