Consumer Rights: MSE Article discussion (DO NOT ASK CONSUMER QUESTIONS HERE)

coocoo51

I am extremely frustrated with so-called consumer rights. The British Government failed to completely implement the EU Directive requiring manufacturers to give a two year warranty on goods because the SOGA supposedly gives more rights. Actually it just makes life more difficult because the consumer has to prove the goods were faulty at the time of purchase if they fail within a reasonable period. The term 'reasonable period' is far too loose and it is nigh on impossible to prove that something was faulty at the time of purchase if it has been working adequately for 18 months. The fact that the goods were not of a sufficient quality to last the 'reasonable length of time' is one that both manufacturers and retailers refuse to acknowledge. WE NEED TO HAVE THE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE INCORPORATED INTO THE SOGA if we are to have equal rights with other EU citizens. It is surprising that neither WHICH? nor Mr Lewis have not been lobbying the government to help ordinary consumers in this respect. I have personally contacted Mr Lamb on this issue, but it has just been 'passed on' for someone else to deal with. Consumers by themselves are ignored. Meanwhile both Amazon and Kodak refuse to have any conscience for selling a printer costing over £150 which lasted only 19 months. If the EU directive operated in Britain I would have had my printer either repaired or replaced or got at least a partial refund. As such I am out of pocket to the tune of £300 because I now have to buy a new printer, which again will only have a 1 year warranty. We are being ripped off by manufacturers, retailers and our government yet consumer organisations seem to think the issue is not important enough to launch a campaign. Why?

custardy

given your price range
go HP and get 3 years cover

http://h41112.www4.hp.com/promo/officejet/uk/en/3-year-warranty.html#

Optimist

coocoo51 wrote: »

I am extremely frustrated with so-called consumer rights. The British Government failed to completely implement the EU Directive requiring manufacturers to give a two year warranty on goods because the SOGA supposedly gives more rights. Actually it just makes life more difficult because the consumer has to prove the goods were faulty at the time of purchase if they fail within a reasonable period. The term 'reasonable period' is far too loose and it is nigh on impossible to prove that something was faulty at the time of purchase if it has been working adequately for 18 months. The fact that the goods were not of a sufficient quality to last the 'reasonable length of time' is one that both manufacturers and retailers refuse to acknowledge. WE NEED TO HAVE THE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE INCORPORATED INTO THE SOGA if we are to have equal rights with other EU citizens. It is surprising that neither WHICH? nor Mr Lewis have not been lobbying the government to help ordinary consumers in this respect. I have personally contacted Mr Lamb on this issue, but it has just been 'passed on' for someone else to deal with. Consumers by themselves are ignored. Meanwhile both Amazon and Kodak refuse to have any conscience for selling a printer costing over £150 which lasted only 19 months. If the EU directive operated in Britain I would have had my printer either repaired or replaced or got at least a partial refund. As such I am out of pocket to the tune of £300 because I now have to buy a new printer, which again will only have a 1 year warranty. We are being ripped off by manufacturers, retailers and our government yet consumer organisations seem to think the issue is not important enough to launch a campaign. Why?

Possibly the reason is simply that you do not have a two year warranty under directive 1999/44/EC.

The directive states that retailers can be held liable for non conformities which arise within 2 years.....That is a long way from a two year warranty

In England and Wales retailers can be held liable for up to 6 years (5 in Scotland) for non conformity thus the UK exceeds the EU requirement.

coocoo51

Possibly the reason is simply that you do not have a two year warranty under directive 1999/44/EC.
I think I made it clear that I do not have a two year warranty. The point is that the two year warranty has not been adopted into UK law - leaving UK consumers at a disadvantage. There are very many people posting within these fora who have the same problem that goods fail after the warranty but well before they have had use over a reasonable period of time.

custardy

coocoo51 wrote: »

Possibly the reason is simply that you do not have a two year warranty under directive 1999/44/EC.
I think I made it clear that I do not have a two year warranty. The point is that the two year warranty has not been adopted into UK law - leaving UK consumers at a disadvantage. There are very many people posting within these fora who have the same problem that goods fail after the warranty but well before they have had use over a reasonable period of time.

try reading the full post you part quoted

Bertie42

I have purchased a wonderful apple iPhone 5 which was delivered on 21st September 12 and I paid for on an MBNA credit card . Today I've dropped it into a tin of paint accidentally and damaged it. Am I covered in any way from MBNA to replace the item?

wealdroam

Bertie42 wrote: »

I have purchased a wonderful apple iPhone 5 which was delivered on 21st September 12 and I paid for on an MBNA credit card . Today I've dropped it into a tin of paint accidentally and damaged it. Am I covered in any way from MBNA to replace the item?

No.

squeaky

Hi cazcaz7

I've moved your question to a thread of its own here:- TV design fault question

squeaky

Hi katykitten,

I've moved your post into a thread of its own here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4271937

CurtisNN

On the 29th October I purchased some jeans from Topman (only £30) whilst on a trip to Edinburgh.

I didn't get to wear the jeans until I got back from my trip and have only wore them twice.
They are not tight in any way and fit perfectly, however on the second wearing of the jeans, I noticed that they had a tear in them (not snagged, a clean tear) so I took them back today to the shop in Middlesbrough, and attempted to get a swap/refund for my item.

However, because there was a tiny bit of fraying in the cut (I had to drive home/wear them for a couple more hours due to visiting friends), they assistant said that they had been cut due to my own doings and that it was my fault for the cut, as it was on the thigh and the faults of jeans are always on the seams (however, I believe that the quality of these jeans were not up to standard, hence the cut appearing)
I refused this, and said that it was not through my own fault, as I would have accepted the blame and bought myself a new pair, however since it wasn't my fault, I don't see why I should have to spend more money (probably in topman) just because the quality of this pair of jeans was rather shoddy.

Do I have anything to go off here, or should I get out the old thread and needle?