Thursday, Nov 29, 2007 at 08:50
The issue of the manufacturers 'warranty' is a common one-the statutory warranties are not time-bounded. If the manufacturer chooses to give a warranty that's fine - but they must live up to it.
The statutory warranty under the TPA is (in part):
• The goods must be of merchantable quality.
This means that they must meet a basic level
of quality and performance that would be
reasonable to expect, considering their price
and the manner in which they are described
(ss. 71(1) and 66(2)).
For example, a shoe should not lose a
heel the fi rst time it is worn, and a new car
should not have rust. However, a loose
door handle on a car may not make the car
unmerchantable.
• The goods must be fi t for their purpose.
This means that they must be suitable for
any particular purpose the consumer made
known to the supplier when negotiating or
arranging to buy them, or a purpose that is
obvious from the circumstances in which the
sale took place (s. 71(2)).
For example, if a consumer tells sales staff
that they are buying tiles for an outdoor patio
and less durable indoor tiles are supplied,
the goods may not be fi t for their purpose.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx
So the 12 month manufactuers warranty for a phone is virtually irrelevant to the extent that the question is: 'is a (say) $400 phone that lasts (say) 13 months 'fit for the purpose or of 'merchantable quality'?
Personally I don't think so (I'm sick of being sold products that have obviously never had a long enough or any time in field testing before being put into the market-these multi nationals are using consumers as tests!) but the point is if you don't think so know your rights and don't be put off by: "sorry sir-its 30 nano -seconds out of warranty!"
Happy days
George
PS - hope all this is not boring you to death but its important.
FollowupID:
537646