Luxury watch - latent defect and not of satisfactory quality (CRA 2015)

Hello all, I would appreciate some views on the legal feasibility of a potential claim. I would hate to pursue legal action (especially as this would be against the retailer, who has done nothing wrong), so I am hoping to resolve this directly with the manufacturer. However, I am considering my options should negotiations fail. My objective is for the manufacturer to cover the full cost of repair, as I believe the watch has suffered from a latent defect that was never properly remedied during the warranty period.

I purchased a watch in June 2020 for under £10,000. It was advertised as water‑resistant (50m, I know this isn't much) and supplied with a five‑year manufacturer's warranty. The first significant issue occurred in August 2021, approximately 14 months after purchase, when the watch steamed up immediately after brief exposure to seawater (I was not even "swimming", more like lying in water). I sent it to the manufacturer under warranty, and it was repaired FOC. No suggestion of misuse, I was told the watch had been cleaned, resealed, and had passed a pressure test (before and after).

Approximately one year later, the same issue occurred again - I was cycling, it started to rain and the watch steamed up again. The same process - sent it for warranty, and again I was told it passed pressure testing and had been cleaned and resealed FOC.

A year after that, the same problem again, was washing my car - only some water spray got onto the watch. The same warranty process was followed, with the same outcome - no fault found, cleaned and resealed FOC.

There were also several minor instances between these major events where the watch steamed up slightly and then dried out on its own within a day. I did not return it for those, but to me, this suggests the watch was not sealing properly. If it were watertight, then it could not dry by itself, but once it dried, there is no point sending it to warranty as there is nothing to see.

Most recently, in January 2026, the watch steamed up again I was digging snow, some snow got under the glove, and it steamed up again. The manufacturer’s warranty expired in June 2025, so I returned it for a paid service, but I highlighted the repeated history and implied that an underlying defect may have been missed during the warranty period. I expected to pay something for the service, but only a symbolic amount, as I consider this a continuation of the same unresolved issue.

This time, the manufacturer has diagnosed an “internally damaged” case tube (with no external damage, which likely would cause a water resistance issue) and recommended a full service plus a dial replacement due to “oxidation”. They have offered a discount on the service as a goodwill gesture due to the history, but the dial is full price. The total cost is just over £1,000.

My concern is that this appears to be a long‑standing, intermittent water ingress issue that was never properly identified or repaired during the warranty period, despite 3 opportunities to do so. Now they have identified the issue, which aligns perfectly with the history of repeated water resistance issues, yet they take no responsibility for it. The new diagnosis also appears inconsistent with the previous findings, where no fault was identified and the watch was repeatedly declared to have passed pressure testing.

Given the above, I am considering whether this could fall under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 - specifically "goods not of satisfactory quality” and whether the six‑year limitation period for latent defects may apply. I understand that expert evidence may be required to establish the technical aspects of the watchmaking side.

On the face of it, does this appear to be a viable case? England.