- Review Centre
- Computers and Gaming
- Computer Hardware
- Laptops
- Packard Bell Easynote K5285
- John Lister's review
Have a picture of Packard Bell Easynote K5285 Laptop?, please send it to us.
| Screen Quality | 3/10  |
|---|---|
| Battery Life | 1.3/10 |
| Ease of Use | 5.7/10 |
| Value for Money | 1/10 |
| Overall rating | 2.3/10 |
By John Lister
on 13th Feb 2005
| Time Laptop Owned | Over 1 Year |
|---|---|
| Screen Quality | 3/10 |
| Battery Life | 2/10 |
| Ease of Use | 2/10 |
| Value for money | 0/10 |
| Overall value | 0/10 |
 John Lister's recommendation | |
After 14 months there are no discernible good points. I suppose it worked satisfactorily for 14 months.
Despite costing £1200 in Sep 03, by Nov 04 several hundred pounds need to be spent to make the laptop serviceable.
At the time of purchasing the Packard Bell Easynote K5285 I resisted considerable pressure from PC World to take out extended warranty - I always do.
After 14 months I was unable to boot up the laptop and sought advice from PC World (the vendor) at Exeter - without success. I sought professional assistance. We were advised that the problem was likely to be minor and that re-installing Windows XP would resolve the problem. However, the DVDRW drive was found to be defective. Again we sought professional assistance to repair the defective drive. The original drive installed was UJ-810b but when our adviser contacted Packard Bell to procure a replacement he was informed that Packard Bell did not recognise this model for the Easynote K5285. He was sent an alternative drive (UJ-811b) but the laptop did not recognise this model in bios.
Thus, it is apparent that the DVDRW drive originally installed was not as per the specification for the Easynote K5285 and alternatives are incompatible with the laptop.
After taking advice from the Trading Standards Office I complained to PC World at York. Predictably the Duty Manager hid behind the skirts of the lapsed 12 month warranty and Packard Bell. He offered to return the laptop to Packard Bell but at a minimum expense of £50. Frankly, I was treated as just another ignorant consumer who could be fobbed off and the Duty Manager was struggling not to laugh in my face.
I am advised that the laptop sold by PC World was not of satisfactory quality and not fit for the purpose as described in their marketing literature. Thus, PC World should be liable for making good a repair or returning the full purchase costs under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as amended in 2002.
I have given PC World 14 days to respond to my complaints after which I will seek address in parallel through Visa and the Small Claims Court. Also, I am writing personally to each board member of Dixon's, the parent company, and have informed all media consumer "watchdogs".
This is a classic example of a large company that is more interested in selling high margin extended warranty policies than actually providing a quality consumer service. Has anyone else had a similar experience with poor goods/shoddy service from PC World/Packard Bell or can anyone give me advice on how best to proceed? If so, please leave a comment on this review and we'll form a pressure group.
Important, please be aware that:
| Helpful | Unhelpful | Agree | Disagree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Total Respect: -1
Would you like to see a review that's not being listed?
antonyx
on 8th Mar 2005
Matt34 on 14th Mar 2005
Matt34 on 17th Mar 2005
supervillain on 29th May 2005
zzzz1234 on 28th Sep 2005
jcarter196 on 22nd Oct 2005
jonarblaster on 23rd Nov 2005
dqjc on 29th Dec 2005
dqjc on 29th Dec 2005