Refurb laptop and the SoGA

kwzr

Bought a refurb laptop from a company, via Amazon marketplace.

The laptop has demonstrated two faults a couple months outside their 1 year back-to-base warranty. The hdd has failed and the laptop overheats so badly it shuts down after 5 mins. Both render the laptop unusable.

In my mind this demonstrates that the laptop was not "of satisfactory quality" when sold, just over a year ago.

Having googled about this, it's my impression that refurb units sold by a business are covered by the Sale of Goods Act in the same way as new units.

I've had several email exchanges where they refuse to do anything about it, as it's outside warranty. I'm now threatening to go to the Small Claims Court this week.

However, I want to make sure I'll win before I do. The laptop was I think over £400, and I want to claim a repair or replacment, not a refund.

What do you guys think are my chances of success?

OlliesDad

kwzr wrote: »

Bought a refurb laptop from a company, via Amazon marketplace.

The laptop has demonstrated two faults a couple months outside their 1 year back-to-base warranty. The hdd has failed and the laptop overheats so badly it shuts down after 5 mins. Both render the laptop unusable.

In my mind this demonstrates that the laptop was not "of satisfactory quality" when sold, just over a year ago.

Having googled about this, it's my impression that refurb units sold by a business are covered by the Sale of Goods Act in the same way as new units.

I've had several email exchanges where they refuse to do anything about it, as it's outside warranty. I'm now threatening to go to the Small Claims Court this week.

However, I want to make sure I'll win before I do. The laptop was I think over £400, and I want to claim a repair or replacment, not a refund.

What do you guys think are my chances of success?

As you have had the unit over 6 months you will need to prove that the unit was inherently faulty and the faults are not due to misuse or wear and tear. An independent report is normally the way to prove this (if proven to be uinherently faulty, you can claim the cost for the report back from the retailer).

[UK]Blitzen

As there was no issue during the first six months, it would be almost impossible to claim it had an inherent fault.

kwzr

[UK]Blitzen wrote: »

As there was no issue during the first six months, it would be almost impossible to claim it had an inherent fault.

So what about the part of the Act that says goods must be "of satisfactory quality" when sold?

Are you saying a laptop only has to last 6 months before dying (or up to the warranty period)?

Freddie_Snowbits

I would get on the techie bored and get the vacuum cleaner out.

The techies will grief on the Hard Disk, the vacuum cleaner will clear out the ventilation holes!

OlliesDad

[UK]Blitzen wrote: »

As there was no issue during the first six months, it would be almost impossible to claim it had an inherent fault.

Thats not true. A qualified engineer will be able to confirm that an item has not been misused or not suffer from normal wear and tear.

An inherent fault does not necessarily show immediately. A poorly manufactured part could be a "ticking time bomb" waiting to fail.

kwzr

OlliesDad wrote: »

Thats not true. A qualified engineer will be able to confirm that an item has not been misused or not suffer from normal wear and tear.

An inherent fault does not necessarily show immediately. A poorly manufactured part could be a "ticking time bomb" waiting to fail.

What qualifies as a "qualified engineer"? I'm guessing a local PC shop?

I've got years of experience building/repairing PCs of the desktop variety myself, but I don't touch laptops

[UK]Blitzen

kwzr wrote: »

So what about the part of the Act that says goods must be "of satisfactory quality" when sold?

Are you saying a laptop only has to last 6 months before dying (or up to the warranty period)?

I'm not saying that.
The law does.

By the nature of your question, the were in fact of satisfactory quality when sold, else you would have seen the issues with the laptop immediately.

neilmcl

[UK]Blitzen wrote: »

I'm not saying that.
The law does.

By the nature of your question, the were in fact of satisfactory quality when sold, else you would have seen the issues with the laptop immediately.

Then you clearly don't understand what the law means regarding an inherent fault.

[UK]Blitzen

neilmcl wrote: »

Then you clearly don't understand what the law means regarding an inherent fault.

I clearly do know.
An inherent fault would have to have been they from the outset.

If it was, it is likely, though not certain to have beennoticeable straight away (which this one wasn't).

neilmcl

[UK]Blitzen wrote: »

If it was, it is likely, though not certain to have beennoticeable straight away (which this one wasn't).

That's just total nonsense. The "fault" does not have to be apparent at the time of sale.