Stop using the appliance, keep it unplugged, and ask the repairer in writing to put the job right or refund the repair cost. If nothing is done, the problem usually drifts into repeated call-outs, extra charges, and a dispute about who caused the fault. Book a second opinion only after the repairer has been given a clear chance to fix their work, and keep every message and receipt. If there is any sign of burning, tripping electrics, or overheating, treat it as a safety issue and do not test it again.
What the problem is
This comes up in the UK when a domestic appliance repair has gone wrong and the household is left with a machine that is still faulty, now worse, or no longer safe to use. It often affects washing machines, dishwashers, ovens, fridges, and tumble dryers, especially when the repair was arranged quickly because the appliance is essential for daily life. The issue usually appears after a first visit that seemed successful, then the fault returns within days or weeks, or a new fault appears immediately after parts were fitted.
In many UK cases the customer has already reported the problem once and received a partial response such as “monitor it”, “it’s a different fault”, or an offer of a paid follow-up visit. The dispute tends to harden after the repairer says the original job was completed correctly and any new symptoms are unrelated, or when the customer is told the appliance is “beyond economical repair” only after money has been taken for parts and labour. It can also surface after a missed promised callback or after a deadline given by the customer has passed without a firm plan to resolve it.
Why this happens
Appliance repairs are often diagnosed under time pressure, with limited testing once the machine appears to run. Common causes include misdiagnosis, fitting an incompatible part, incomplete reassembly, damage to wiring or seals during the repair, or a temporary improvement that masks the underlying fault. Some appliances also have multiple linked issues, so replacing one component can expose another weakness, but the customer experience is still that the repair did not deliver the expected working appliance.
Business behaviour plays a big role because many repairers run on tight margins and schedule density, so returning to a job for free can feel like lost time compared with taking new bookings. Where subcontractors are used, the person answering the phone may not have full notes, and the visit may be treated as a new job rather than a continuation. A typical organisational response pattern is to reframe the complaint as “wear and tear” or “a separate fault” so the follow-up can be charged.
There is also an incentive problem around parts: if a part has been fitted and the supplier will not take it back, the repairer may resist admitting the diagnosis was wrong. If the customer has already paid in full, the repairer may slow down on follow-up unless the complaint is kept clear, written, and tied to a specific remedy. Where the appliance is older, some repairers lean on the idea that any failure is inevitable, even when the immediate issue is poor workmanship or an incorrect part.
Your rights in the UK
The practical position is that a paid repair is a service, and the customer can expect competent work and a result that matches what was agreed. The strongest leverage usually comes from being specific: the appliance was paid to be repaired for a stated fault, it is not working properly after the repair, and the customer wants the repairer to redo the work properly or refund the cost of the failed repair. Keeping the request focused on the service outcome avoids getting dragged into technical arguments about which component failed.
What tends to work in UK disputes is giving the repairer one clear opportunity to put it right within a reasonable time, then escalating through the payment route or formal complaint route if they refuse or delay. If the repair has created a safety risk or caused visible damage, the customer’s position is stronger when the appliance is taken out of use and the complaint is framed as “unsafe after repair” rather than “still noisy”. If the repairer insists on charging again to correct the same problem, asking them to explain in writing why the original paid work did not resolve the fault often prompts a more serious response.
Where there is a warranty on the repair, it helps, but a lack of a written warranty does not automatically mean the customer has no practical remedy. The key is to separate “new unrelated fault” from “repair not done properly” using dates, symptoms, and what was touched during the visit. If the repairer blames the customer for misuse without evidence, the dispute often turns on whether the appliance was used normally and whether the fault appeared immediately after the repair.
Legal or official basis
The main UK basis to rely on is the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which sets expectations for services and gives practical remedies when a service is not carried out with reasonable care and skill. In day-to-day terms, this supports asking for the repair to be repeated properly at no extra cost, or for a price reduction if a proper fix is not provided within a reasonable time. It also supports keeping the complaint about the service you paid for, not about whether the appliance is old or whether another part might fail later.
For a plain-English explanation of how these service rights work in practice, use GOV.UK guidance and mirror the same structure in the complaint: what was agreed, what was paid, what happened, and what remedy is being requested. Keeping the remedy realistic helps; for example, asking for the cost of the failed repair back is often more achievable than demanding a brand-new replacement appliance from an independent repairer.
What evidence matters
Evidence is less about proving the exact component and more about showing a clear timeline and a clear link between the repair and the ongoing problem. Collect anything that shows what was booked, what fault was reported, what parts were fitted, what was tested, and what happened afterwards. If the appliance is unsafe, photos of scorch marks, melted plugs, water leaks, or error codes can be useful, but safety comes first and the appliance should not be repeatedly powered on to “get a better video”.
Do not start dismantling the appliance or letting multiple people tinker with it before the original repairer has been given a fair chance to put it right, because it becomes easier for the repairer to argue the situation has been altered. Also avoid agreeing on the phone to a paid revisit “just to take a look” if the revisit is really about correcting the same repair outcome; get the terms in writing first.
Checklist to pull together before the next contact:
- Invoice or receipt showing date, amount, and what was done
- Any written quote, booking confirmation, or job reference
- Messages or notes of calls showing what fault was reported and when
- Photos of the appliance condition and any visible damage after the repair
Three common mistakes seen in UK repair disputes are paying for a second engineer too early, accepting vague promises without a date for return, and throwing away packaging or old parts before the dispute is settled. One thing not to do yet is commission a full strip-down report from another repairer unless the original repairer has refused in writing to return or there is a clear safety reason to stop them attending.
What to do next
Pause and document
Unplug the appliance and stop using it if there is any safety concern, repeated tripping, burning smells, sparking, leaking near electrics, or overheating. Write down the timeline while it is fresh: the original fault, the repair date, what was said on arrival, what was replaced, and when the problem returned. Save screenshots of texts and emails, and take a clear photo of any error code or warning light without repeatedly restarting the machine.
Send a clear request
Contact the repairer in writing (email or text is fine) and keep it short: the repair was paid for, the appliance is still faulty or unsafe after the repair, and the requested remedy is a free re-do of the repair within a reasonable time or a refund of the repair cost. Ask for a proposed appointment date or a written refusal. If the repairer is already saying the fault is “different”, it helps to state that the appliance did not work properly after their visit and the outcome paid for has not been delivered.
Allow one return
Give one reasonable opportunity for the repairer to inspect and correct the work, but set a boundary: confirm that the visit is to rectify the failed repair and that no additional labour charge will be applied for the same issue unless agreed in advance in writing. If the repairer wants to charge for parts again, ask for an explanation of why the original part did not resolve the fault and whether it will be removed and refunded. Where the situation matches the common pattern of a repeat fault after a repair, the decision point is whether it is truly a new issue or the same outcome not being achieved; the scenario described in Repair replaced but fault remains is often the closest match when the appliance briefly improved and then failed again.
Use official process
If the repairer is part of a larger company, use its official complaints process rather than informal back-and-forth with a single engineer. The complaints form or process is normally found on the company website under “Complaints”, “Contact”, or “Customer care”, and it usually asks for the job reference, dates, the fault description, and what remedy is being requested. Prepare the key information before starting so the complaint can be submitted in one go without adding extra personal details beyond what is needed to locate the job.
Checklist to prepare for the official complaint submission:
- Job reference, invoice number, and repair date
- Brief description of the original fault and current symptoms
- What remedy is requested (redo or refund) and a reasonable deadline
- Photos or screenshots that show the problem without repeated testing
A normal response timeframe for a formal complaint is within 14 days, with a practical resolution often taking longer if parts or scheduling are involved. If there is no response by day 14, escalate by replying to the same complaint thread (or resubmitting through the same official channel) stating that the deadline has passed and the next step will be to pursue recovery through the payment method used, attaching the original complaint text again. One sentence that reflects what is usually seen in UK cases is that the matter is usually resolved once the repairer realises the complaint is being kept formal and tied to a clear remedy.
Escalate payment route
If the repairer refuses to rectify or goes quiet, the next practical lever is the payment route. For card payments, ask the card provider about chargeback options and provide the timeline and evidence that the paid service did not deliver the agreed outcome; for bank transfer, ask the bank what recovery options exist, understanding they are more limited. If the repair was paid in cash, escalation tends to rely more on written complaints and any trade body process the repairer belongs to, but the same evidence pack still matters.
Change strategy
If the appliance is needed urgently and the repairer cannot attend within a reasonable time, it may be necessary to book an independent repairer, but only after the original repairer has been told in writing that they are being given a final chance to resolve it by a stated date. If a second engineer is used, ask for a short written note describing what was found and whether the previous work appears incomplete or incorrect, without asking them to apportion blame beyond what they can genuinely see. If the original repairer later offers to return, it is reasonable to require them to confirm in writing what they will do and whether any further charge will apply.
Related issues on this site
If the repairer’s response shifts into blaming the household for the fault, the pattern and wording can matter because it often becomes a dispute about normal use versus alleged misuse; Faulty service blamed on user is relevant when the business starts insisting the customer caused the problem without showing clear evidence. Where the bigger issue is that the booked service never really happened as agreed, such as repeated no-shows or a repair that was never completed, the situation can overlap with service non-delivery and may need a different escalation approach.
FAQ
Repeat visit charges
Repeat visit charges after a failed appliance repair are often challenged by stating the revisit is to rectify the original paid work, not a new job. Ask for the charge basis in writing before agreeing.
Safety concerns
Safety concerns after an appliance repair should be handled by stopping use and reporting the issue as unsafe, not just inconvenient. If there is burning, sparking, or tripping electrics, do not keep testing it.
Second opinion timing
Second opinion timing for a faulty repair is best after the original repairer has been given a clear chance to return within a set deadline. Getting another engineer too early can muddy responsibility.
Refund versus redo
Refund versus redo for a botched repair usually depends on whether the repairer can fix the problem properly within a reasonable time. If they cannot or will not, a refund of the repair cost is often the practical ask.
Before you move on
Write a single, calm message that sets the remedy and a deadline, then stop negotiating by phone until there is a written response that matches what is being offered. Time pressure often shows up as being pushed to accept a paid revisit immediately to “keep the slot”.
Get help with the next step
Contact UKFixGuide — Share the repair date, what was paid for, and what the repairer has said about returning or charging again.
