MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Croker · 03-19-2009, 07:14 PM

There's some contradictory and flat out wrong information in this thread about the situation in the UK, so here are the key points you need to know:

- Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

- Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

- Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

- It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

- If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)

- For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

In short, if I buy a £10 toaster, and it breaks after 4 years, trying to force the retailer to replace or repair it would be seen as a ridiculous request, because that's a reasonable length of time for a £10 toaster to last.

However, what of a £220 piece of electronics hardware? Well, I think it could easily be argued that it would reasonable for such an item to last a period of years. If said item breaks within a week of purchase, then it is the retailer's responsibility to repair or replace it.

It would also be the responsibility of the retailer to prove that the item was not inherently faulty as it less than 6 months old. It's not for you to prove that. All you need to do is assert that the item is broken, nothing more than that.

This link explains it all clearly, anyway.

If you'd like to discuss this further, please drop me a line. As I said earlier in this thread, I had to fight Argos for similar reasons last year, and I won that one. Your case is even better than mine was, too!

Best of luck!

03-19-2009, 07:14 PM	#27
Croker Connoisseur Posts: 94 Karma: 630 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Melbourne, Australia Device: Kobo Libra Colour, obv.	There's some contradictory and flat out wrong information in this thread about the situation in the UK, so here are the key points you need to know: - Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale). - Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description. - Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety. - It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract. - If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances) - For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement). In short, if I buy a £10 toaster, and it breaks after 4 years, trying to force the retailer to replace or repair it would be seen as a ridiculous request, because that's a reasonable length of time for a £10 toaster to last. However, what of a £220 piece of electronics hardware? Well, I think it could easily be argued that it would reasonable for such an item to last a period of years. If said item breaks within a week of purchase, then it is the retailer's responsibility to repair or replace it. It would also be the responsibility of the retailer to prove that the item was not inherently faulty as it less than 6 months old. It's not for you to prove that. All you need to do is assert that the item is broken, nothing more than that. This link explains it all clearly, anyway. If you'd like to discuss this further, please drop me a line. As I said earlier in this thread, I had to fight Argos for similar reasons last year, and I won that one. Your case is even better than mine was, too! Best of luck!