Product Warranty Issues

[bk T]

If I bought an item (with 12 months warranty) when it was on Special at $100. After 6 months of using, it developed a some problems.

Took it back to the retailer where I bought it, they are happy to replace it with a new one but as the new retail price is now $120; and I have to pay another $20 in order to get it replaced. Also, the warranty ends 12 months from the original date of purchase, not the replacement date.

Is this fair?

[Roscoe]

That's not right. The retailer is not replacing it, the manufacturer is and the retailer will get his money back and he will undoubtedly receive the new price as a refund.

Although I think that the warranty should be from the replacement date, it seems that that is not how it works, the warranty runs from the original purchase date. So they don't warrant the replacement for the same as the original. That does not seem right to me.

[zqwerty]

See Consumer Guarantees Act for your rights.

Basically a product has to perform to reasonable expectations including working for a reasonable amount of time, the guarantee given by the manufacturer and or retailer is superseded by the CGA under all circumstances in NZ.

Just mention "CGA" to the the people who sold you the faulty product that should have them quivering in their boots especially if you say you are going to contact the Authority over the issue.

[zqwerty]

I did just this over a pair of expensive hiking boots, $275 that did not even last a year before developing a hole in the leather at the side of the boots, the last supposedly identical pair made by the same manufacturer lasted more than 10 years without developing a similar fault.

They replaced the boots but I can see that what has happened is the manufacturing standards have dropped since they made the first pair of boots (called "cutting out the fat I believe"; in other words once a successful product has been achieved ie good sales, then the product is made using the minimum amount of quality materials although it remains with a similar look to the original), so the replacement pair of boots are also going to fail in a similar way due to using substandard leather if it even is leather now.

[tweak'e]

If I bought an item (with 12 months warranty) when it was on Special at $100. After 6 months of using, it developed a some problems.

Took it back to the retailer where I bought it, they are happy to replace it with a new one but as the new retail price is now $120; and I have to pay another $20 in order to get it replaced. Also, the warranty ends 12 months from the original date of purchase, not the replacement date.

Is this fair?

F no.
thats a simple con. they are required to replace it free of charge.
i would not be to surprised if the person you dealt with was pocketing the extra $20.

[piroska]

Took it back to the retailer where I bought it, they are happy to replace it with a new one but as the new retail price is now $120; and I have to pay another $20 in order to get it replaced. Also, the warranty ends 12 months from the original date of purchase, not the replacement date.

1)Mention the CGA and point out what you paid is irrelevant. That's wrong.
2)Yes. Your warranty doesn't extend every time you get a nother....

[1101]

3) there is no such thing as 12mth warranty. Full stop.
Goods have to last a reasonable time, manufacturers warranty period is now completely irrelevant. Retailers know this .

4) Its illegal to try & mislead you regarding your CGA rights. The retailer is in Breach of the CGA just buy saying you have to pay $20 to have it replaced
If they wont/cant replace it, they must refund .

5) Retailers try in on . Often .
And why not, the CGA is hardly ever policed and actual prosecutions for CAG breaches are rare .

[piroska]

And why not, the CGA is hardly ever policed and actual prosecutions for CAG breaches are rare .

That's not true. It's that people don't complain, often don't understand their rights and just accept it.

[Kame]

Obviously our government has no balls to tell the manufactures that they should stop offering warranties and use the CGA. Manufacturer warranties just misleads the consumer into thinking that once the warranty is up, that's it. Manufacturers and retailers would love you to believe this. That is why these warranties should not ever be placed on goods and that they just abide by the CGA.

[bk T]

I'm aware that we have CGA in NZ, but challenging them in the CGA tribunal takes time. Not everyone can afford to take time off work and the hassle to 'fight' for $20 , for example.