Headache over hell’s hairdryer
A HAIRDRYER that behaved like it was designed by a torturer led to a knot of problems for one reader.
After she switched it on for the first time some of her hair was sucked into its back and got tangled around the motor.
The device ripped a “huge clump” from her scalp and she had to cut another piece off because she could not untangle it.
Apart from the trauma, the reader, called Lucy, had large chunks of her locks missing and a severely scarred scalp after the catastrophe last May.
But that was just the start of her ordeal because she has been trying to claim for compensation ever since – so far without success.
Lucy, who bought the product from a television shopping channel, first contacted the maker of the hairdryer, sending them pictures of her damaged scalp.
They then organised to retrieve it for an inspection.
Four months later they wrote back saying that they had found no fault so they were closing the complaint.
Lucy did not accept this so she wrote them a further letter threatening legal proceedings. This letter was ignored.
She then wrote a third time in December and chased them again in February until she finally received a response on Tuesday, March 13. This reply was from their lawyers. They said any claim Lucy attempted to bring would be hopeless because the hairdryer was not defective.
Lucy’s point is that there is not a sufficient guard at the back of the hairdryer to stop hair tangling around the motor.
If this is correct she will definitely have a case. Therefore, her key rights are as follows. THE LAW Section 2 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act provides that anyone who suffers damage as a result of the defect of a product is entitled to claim damages, as long as the damage was caused wholly or partly by the defect. TIMING OF YOUR CLAIM
Claims under the Consumer Protection Act must be commenced within three years from the date you become aware of t he damage.
You must also bring the claim within ten years after the product was last put into circulation. DEFENCE
If the producer can prove that the product was not faulty when they sold it this will be an absolute defence to a claim.