Sale of goods act?

Blacksheep1979

pitkin2020 wrote: »

By the time the OP gets to the recommended 6 years

Yes and here's another one who doesn't know what they're on about and proof that a little information is a dangerous thing. SOG act states goods should last up to 6 years, not that they should last 6 years.

Do you know how much extra we probably pay in the uk due to people 'knowing their rights' and wasting companies time?

bingo_bango

Actually, the Limitations Act 1980 states how long you have to take a civil claim. SoGA simply refers to the remedies. It the first act which dictates how long you have to seek a claim.

Esqui

I'd get in contact with Game...making sure you have all the facts straight (you do seem to know what you're talking about!). If I remember rightly, from other people posting on here, they're quite good about this sort of thing.

bigsi

Thanks for everyones replies, The two different opinions given are why i posted to see if i could find a definite answer. In my opinion i would expect it to last longer than 3 years but it seems that some people have got shops to replace there broken consoles and others who say just pay Sony it's tough that your console broke.
My Playstation has broken with the YLOD which from looking round the internet seems to be a fairly common problem.

I don't know what to do i have not got the £131 Sony want at the moment anyway so i'm going to have to wait till i have this cash, I'm not one who feels that comfortable going into a shop and kicking up a fuss but if it's worked for others and will save me cash i have not got i think i might be willing to do it.

Thanks again
Simon

Colliefrog

You're always going to get conflicting opinions on here! I'm not saying my opinion is right, just what I would do in your situation. If you don't have the cash to pay for the replacement then give Game a try. You've nothing to lose! Good luck and let us all know the outcome.

pitkin2020

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

Yes and here's another one who doesn't know what they're on about and proof that a little information is a dangerous thing. SOG act states goods should last up to 6 years, not that they should last 6 years.

Do you know how much extra we probably pay in the uk due to people 'knowing their rights' and wasting companies time?

Recommended was not the right word to use, i'll accept that. But you have up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) where purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).
As I mentioned in my first post the OP should go to the retailer first as they are the retailer whom the OP has the contract with. As I already mentioned as its over 6 months since the purchase the onus is on the OP to prove it has an inherent fault, if its the YLOD it shouldn't be a problem.

Do you know how much extra we probably pay in the uk due to people 'knowing their rights' and wasting companies time?
No do you?
How much does it cost consumers who don't know their rights and happily roll over and stump up cash for repairs on items that have inherent faults. With regards to the OP it doesn't matter if his PS3 is 12 months and 1 day old or 3 years old, its still out of warranty. Sony would still want him to pay the £131 for a refurb unit. Had it of failed just out of the 12 month warranty would your advice still been to buy the refurb unit.

Even going back to the retailer doesn't guarantee it will be repaired or replaced. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the goods, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit.

jonnyd281

pitkin2020 wrote: »

Even going back to the retailer doesn't guarantee it will be repaired or replaced. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the goods, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit.

Don't you (as the customer) after 6 months have to prove that it is an inherent fault present at time of manufacture, which will probably involve paying for an engineers report?

pitkin2020

jonnyd281 wrote: »

Don't you (as the customer) after 6 months have to prove that it is an inherent fault present at time of manufacture, which will probably involve paying for an engineers report?

After six months you do have to prove its an inherent fault, up until 6 months the onus is on the retailer to prove it isn't. I did mention it in my posts. You have then up till 6 years to make a claim for damages. Obviously some products are not intended to last six years so it can not apply to all goods. Personally I would say a £400 PS3 should last atleast 6 years.

Even if the OP factors the cost of a report approx £20-£40 its still cheaper than £130 ish. Also most retailers are fully aware of the problems with the PS3 (YLOD) and reading other peoples experiences on this forum and others most are returning them to retailers and they are sorting the repair out.

vyle

Thanatos had a very informative thread documenting his trials and tribulations of getting a PS3 replaced under SOGA. He had to do a lot of work, such as getting an approved engineer to diagnose the fault (he had to pay them up front to do this and claim the money back from the shop), but he won out in the end.

One useful nugget is that Kaz Hirai has been quoted as saying the PS3 lifespan will be ten years:

'Sony Computer Entertainment America President and CEO Kaz "Riiiiiiidge Racer" Hirai sat down for a comfy chat with CNet the other day, and, as per the typical Sony interview these days, produced some ambitious commentary.
On the subject of the PS3's $600 price tag, the Sony president had the following bit of consumer advice to impart:

"I think that we are offering a very good value for the consumers. We look at our products having a 10-year life cycle, which we've proven with the PlayStation. Therefore, the PlayStation 3 is going to be a console that's going to be with you again for 10 years. We're not going to ask the consumers to suddenly buy another PlayStation console in five years time, and basically have their investment go by the wayside. So for all those reasons, I think at $599 we're offering a very good value to the consumers."'

So yes, lasting three years is just under 1/3 of what one should expect from the PS3, assuming you can prove it's an inherent fault.

pitkin2020

Vyle nice find, the PS3 is outstanding value if you get 10 years out of, even 6 years is still good value, but anything less and your just throwing money away.

The PS3 is still a relatively new console (Mar 2007), but as time is going by more and more cases of the YLOD are appearing as the consoles are becoming a few years old. An issue which Sony seem to be ignoring at the moment, and if anyone just rolls over and buys a refurb unit why would they bother to fix it when they can sell you the console for £400 then a few years later sell you a 2nd hand unit again.