An expensive Plasma .... But 5 years ago

Matty007

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

The Sale of Goods Act doesn't allow you to buy a TV and have it maintained / replaced forever. If that is the aim then there are extended guarantees, but even then most won't touch items over 5 years old.

I think we all know that, that why there is a limitation of 6 years.

Guarantees are not really an issue here, generally I think SOGA covers our legal rights quite adequately whereas warranties are profit making tools and have no real stake in customer protection.

Mark_Hewitt

Matty007 wrote: »

I think we all know that, that why there is a limitation of 6 years.

The 6 years does not of course mean that an item should last for 6 years, it only says that it should last a 'reasonable' amount of time. And I don't think you'd be able to argue that 5 years was not reasonable. In fact there are few items where making a claim after 6 years would be successful, and TV's certainly are not one of them.

Guarantees are not really an issue here, generally I think SOGA covers our legal rights quite adequately whereas warranties are profit making tools and have no real stake in customer protection.

SOGA is only there to protect against products which are inherently faulty at the time of manufacture or are not sufficiently durable. Since the TV lasted 5 years I would assert that it was not faulty and nor was it insufficiently durable.

You really have no claim here! Get the repair or a new TV.

Matty007

zppp wrote: »

As mentioned before, it has nothing to do with price. I bought a computer 11 years ago, and paid alot, because it was new at the time. Witin 5 years, PC prices went through the floor. It is unfortunately something that happens with technology. Price is not the issue.

But my view is not based on the price fluctuations of the TV I bought, it is whether it is reasonable for me to expect for the TV to last for more than 5 years and I believe the SOGA may indicate that it is reasonable to expect a lifespan of more than 5 years.

I am surprised that many are so willing to dismiss the price issue, it is a likely indicator to what one should reasonably expect from any product.

We are not paying the 'technology fairy' here, but a retailer who is making a greater profit on selling a higher priced item than others of a lower price.

We all use cost as an indicator of quality/service throughout our consumer lives.

As an aside, if a component is intrinsic to an items function, surely the component that fails should also be expected to last as long as the item as a whole.

So it is again important to try to ascertain what is a reasonable time for a higher priced TV to last.

Thanks again as I am enjoying the debate and your views.

Regards
Matty007

Matty007

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

The 6 years does not of course mean that an item should last for 6 years, it only says that it should last a 'reasonable' amount of time. And I don't think you'd be able to argue that 5 years was not reasonable. In fact there are few items where making a claim after 6 years would be successful, and TV's certainly are not one of them.

SOGA is only there to protect against products which are inherently faulty at the time of manufacture or are not sufficiently durable. Since the TV lasted 5 years I would assert that it was not faulty and nor was it insufficiently durable.

You really have no claim here! Get the repair or a new TV.

Gonna disagree with you here, but I hear you loud and clear that your view is that a TV has a reasonable lifespan of 5 years.

Thanks for your view.

Matty007

OlliesDad

The problem that has already been stated is that it will be up to you (well your mother really) to prove that the fault is inherent and not due to wear and tear or misuse.

This will normally be by getting an engineers report stating that the parts have failed prematurely.

zppp

Matty007 wrote: »

So it is again important to try to ascertain what is a reasonable time for a higher priced TV to last.

It says nowhere is SOGA about the price varying the amount of time which would be a reasonable lifespan for a product. Price does not have any bearing whatsoever on the lifetime of the product.

Matty007

zppp wrote: »

It says nowhere is SOGA about the price varying the amount of time which would be a reasonable lifespan for a product. Price does not have any bearing whatsoever on the lifetime of the product.

I am going to disagree again.

Your right in as much as SOGA can be quite vague at times for varying reasons.

But when assessing satisfactory quality, its price remains a key indicator.

Matty007

custardy

delain wrote: »

I read somewhere when I looked into it that some retailers won't give extended warranties on Plasma TV's because they're so unreliable. (I might be wrong, it's just a vague feeling) so you probably won't get far.

She'd do better to buy a new TV.

i have a 5 year warranty on mine
Plasmas have come a long way and i dont think 5 years from any TV is a short life

custardy

Matty007 wrote: »

But my view is not based on the price fluctuations of the TV I bought, it is whether it is reasonable for me to expect for the TV to last for more than 5 years and I believe the SOGA may indicate that it is reasonable to expect a lifespan of more than 5 years.

I am surprised that many are so willing to dismiss the price issue, it is a likely indicator to what one should reasonably expect from any product.

We are not paying the 'technology fairy' here, but a retailer who is making a greater profit on selling a higher priced item than others of a lower price.

We all use cost as an indicator of quality/service throughout our consumer lives.

As an aside, if a component is intrinsic to an items function, surely the component that fails should also be expected to last as long as the item as a whole.

So it is again important to try to ascertain what is a reasonable time for a higher priced TV to last.

Thanks again as I am enjoying the debate and your views.

Regards
Matty007

sorry.are you saying all TVs are the same and the more expensive ones are simply more expensive to make a greater profit?

zppp

Matty007 wrote: »

I am going to disagree again.

Your right in as much as SOGA can be quite vague at times for varying reasons.

But when assessing satisfactory quality, its price remains a key indicator.

Matty007

How would that work in practice though? I could buy a plasma for £2000 from one retailer or go and find one half price in another for exactly the same model. I don't see how the one for £2000 would have a 'greater lifespan' than the one for £1000. (given they are the same model)

I still think you are missing the point of what we are saying. You need to prove an inherent fault. If you cannot, you have no case.