Statutory warranties

Submitted: Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:21
ThreadID: 54034 Views:1807 Replies:1 FollowUps:8
This Thread has been Archived
There have been many queries in recent posts regarding manufacturers warranties, time limits etc etc. The following is from the ACCC website and may cast some light on the TPA provisions in that regard-it is a 2006 article:

ACCC obtains consent orders against LG Electronics over mobile telephones for warranty misrepresentations

The Federal Court has declared that LG Electronics Australia Pty Ltd had made false or misleading representations in several of its online mobile telephone user manuals, thus breaching the consumer protection provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

The court found that LG made false or misleading representations about the existence and duration of statutory conditions and warranties implied by the Act and also about the rights and remedies that were available to mobile telephone owners/consumers.

The orders, handed down by consent, follow proceedings instituted by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in December last year.

The orders require LG to:

refrain from making representations to similar effect in the future
implement an upgraded trade practices compliance program
arrange the publication of consumer notices on its website and in all major Australian newspapers
provide each of its mobile telephones retailers with a notice explaining the relevant provisions of the Act, and
pay the ACCC's costs.
The Trade Practices Act 1974, and relevant state-based fair trading laws, imply certain conditions and warranties into all consumer contracts. These include, for example, conditions that goods are of merchantable quality and are fit for the particular purpose(s) made known to the supplier. Such conditions and warranties cannot be excluded, restricted or modified and are in addition to any voluntary warranty that may be provided by the supplier.

"The ACCC will not hesitate to take action against businesses which mislead consumers about their statutory rights", ACCC Chairman, Mr Graeme Samuel, said. "Consumers can be tricked into thinking that they can't have a faulty item replaced, or get a refund, because the manufacturer's express warranty period has expired, when that may not be so".

Have a look around the ACCC web site - it's a good read for all consumers.
Happy days

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member -Signman - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:57

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:57
ACCC ?? Are they the same mob that found there was no problems with fuel pricing recently???

AnswerID: 284480

Follow Up By: howesy - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 11:20

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 11:20
I'm with you.
We dont use more fuel and manufacturing costs are not significantly down But fuel companies are making record profits.
You would have to be an idiot not to see that we are being taken for a ride and that collusion takes place but yeah The ACCC says its all above board. they are either idiots or money talks.
FollowupID: 549259

Follow Up By: AdlelaideGeorge - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:35

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:35
Those comments are a completely false representation of the ACCC's assessment of the current pricing by oil companies-read this:

29/01/2008 7:58:00 PM.

The head of the ACCC has hinted at a move to bring another petrol refinery operator into Australia to challenge the power of the big four oil companies.

Graham Samuel has attacked Caltex, Shell, BP and Mobil for jacking up prices and then blaming refinery problems for the hikes.

Mr Samuel has told the Seven network the only way to ensure fair petrol pricing is to bring in real competition.

"What you've got to do is to ensure that you've got some real competition," said Mr Samuel.

"And that competition will come from someone independent of the four major oil companies."


Mr Samuels said on the television news last night that he thought prices were 4 cents higher than they should can your comments be justifed???????? And anyway the ACCC did ensure that LG were taken to task about their misleading representations regarding stautory warranties-wasn't that a good thing?????????

Happy days
FollowupID: 549270

Follow Up By: howesy - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:11

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:11
The ACCC have been gunna do something for ages and its like waving a big stick with all these enquiries. Unless they can prove with solid black and white evidence what we all know then they are powerless and the oil companies know this. More competition will have more corruption. Being older I remember when the petrol prices were regulated along with banks. Govts. said deregulation would stimulate competition and lead to cheap prices and benefits for the customer but they didn't factor corruption and collusion. I dont believe there is one formerly regulated industry out there that I can see has led to a better deal for anyone but the shareholder. Banks and oil companies make record profits while the customer pays through the nose for it and it wont change unless the ACCC moves to regulate the industry.
Draft the legislation and keep threatening to invoke it and i bet they find a way to sell cheaper.
FollowupID: 549302

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:16

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:16
As far as I know the role of the ACCC is to make sure that everyone abides by the Trade Practices Act. In other words their power is limited by the Act.

The only way to increase the power of the ACCC is through the Act.

In 2002, the oppsotision of the day asked the government why hasn't the ACCC been given more power to deal with petrol prices. The minister's reply was that due to the invasion of Iraq (which was under sanctions at the time) more oil will be available and ..."the ACCC doesn't need special powers to freeze petrol prices, like in Gulf War 1, becauses prices will soon drop anyway."

The transcript of this parliament discussion has been recently removed.

We're still waiting for that price drop, and only time will tell if the new govenrment does what they were requesting 6 years ago. Keeping in mind that the transcript has been removed - I doubt it.


FollowupID: 549303

Follow Up By: AdlelaideGeorge - Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:51

Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008 at 15:51
not being patronising but - that's the sort of excellent research and informed contribution this forum could do with more of.

The removal of that link may not be part of the usual political process - it was after all a 2002 item and would still be available via Hansard.

The new opposition will no doubt keep the new Government honest on these matters when Parliament resumes.

Happy days
FollowupID: 549308

Follow Up By: Member - Bucky (VIC) - Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 05:57

Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 05:57
Good call Signman.
A toothless tiger.

Cannot see just how it works, when it works, they must shake in their boots when the Oil Companies click their fingers.

$30 a barrell ,,,,pump price $ 1.10- $1.20

$90 a barrell,,,,pump porice $1.50

Not rocket science to me, even with the rising AU$

FollowupID: 549411

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:30

Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:30
Wasn't it the ACCC (Alan Fels back then) that raided the offices of Caltex several years ago based on an anonymous tip off about price fixing???

Didn't it turn out that after taking masses of documents and interviewing hundreds of people and generally spending a $hit load of tax payers dollars they very quietly delivered all the documents taken back to Caltex with an apology and a sum of money in compo in an attempt to ward of legal action for slandering Caltex by claiming they were involved in price collusion and fixing with other oil companies???
Or has my memory failed me and I got the whole story wrong??
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

FollowupID: 549418

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:53

Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 at 09:53
Let's not forget one thing. It is not illegal for any private company to sell their products at any price they like.

What is illegal, is to prevent competition with collusion and price fixing. If the ACCC can't prove in the courts that there has been any price fixing (like for the visy group) there is not much more they can do. The ACCC can only say "petrol shouldbe 4cents cheaper," but since our government does not generally regulate prices, the ACCC cannot impose any prices on any private company.

The only thing that will bring prices down is competition.

FollowupID: 549432

Sponsored Links