'Top end' electrical device failing.

[Dr Bob]

We bought a 'top end' electrical device 2 years ago for £5500. This was an all singing, all dancing top of the range model. When we got it home it didnt work. It was sent back and repaired. It had not been built properly or QC'd properly. After 5 months, another problem stopped it working all together and it was sent back again for repair. The unit then worked fine until just before it was 2 years old and another fault appeared that again stopped it working completely. I sent it back again but said that if it was a serious fault I would reject it under the CRA. They found a serious fault but repaired it under warranty. I however have rejected it and am seeking money back. The unit is still in their possession. They are saying that under the CRA, any item over 6 months old, they have the opportunity to fix it once and only then can I reject it if they cant fix it. It is now in working order. I contend that it broke twice in the first 6 months and therefore they had 2 opportunities to fix it. Can I reject it and ask for my money (or part of it) back?

[davenewbergr]

The rule is this. Consumers are entitled, amongst other things, to goods which are free from minor defects and are fit for purpose (called here 'the statutory requirements'). If this is not the case the consumer is entitled to 'rescind' the contract - which means he gets the full purchase price (with some exceptions where post and packaging may be taken into account) and the retailer gets the product back. Note - and bear in mind this is a UK law, not necessarily applying elsewhere - that you deal with the retailer.
If a consumer product develops a fault within the first six months, it is presumed as a matter of law that the fault was intrinsic, and that the product didn't comply with the statutory requirement that it be free from minor defects and/or fit for purpose. If the case becomes contentious and a claim is issued, the retailer will be required to prove otherwise.
If the product develops a fault after the first six months, then it is presumed that when it was purchased it complied with the statutory requirements. It is up to the consumer to prove otherwise.
Attempts to fix the produce are completely irrelevant.
Your position, then, is that you would have to prove that - with respect to the current problem you have with the item - it was defective when you collected or took delivery of the item. By 'prove' I mean that you would need to instruct a suitably qualified person to undertake an inspection of the item and provide you with a written report (an expert report) saying what the problem is and whether it is possible to say when the fault first occurred - before you took possession or afterward. That report, of course, may cost a significant amount of money. After repair works have been carried out it may be impossible for an expert to be able to tell.
The reason why this is such a hard test is that you have had the item for 2 years. My guess is that - at that price - it's probably a flat-screen TV. So you have had it and mostly enjoyed it for 24 months - and now you want all your money back, leaving the retailer significantly out of pocket and you've had a free TV for 2 years.