Sale of Goods Act, how long should a digital camera last?

Lirin

TBH, 2-3 years is pretty average for a compact. The value drops that fast, and they are made to a budget, and not particularly strong compared to other types of cameras.
I have SLR's that I used starting out that are still fully functioning- and they've had servicing. Would doubt most people service compacts- the cost just doesn't justify anymore.
For faulty sensors and motor functionality- you'd have a hard job proving they were not from operater use, especially given the timeframe. I'm not making an accusation- I've repaired plenty of cameras in my 30 years, and know just how little it takes to damage them.
The A range wasn't the top range- they are decent enough cameras, but are basic bulky plastic ones. I'd be interested in knowing how you get on- Canon can be quite decent to talk to, and have sorted issues out before, where quite frankly, I was trying my luck.

Flyboy152

Mids_Costcutter wrote: »

Since February I've been pursuing a Section 75 claim (Consumer Credit Act 1974) from my credit card issuer for a refund for a faulty digital camera bought just 5 years ago. The retailer is no longer trading hence the need to follow the Section 75 route.

My claim has just been rejected on the basis that "the camera has lasted more than a reasonable length of time, taking into account the purchase price, advancements in technology and fair 'wear and tear'".

The camera, a Canon PowerShot A85, cost £140.74 at the time. I consider this to be a decent amount of money. According to the Sale of Goods Act goods should last a reasonable length of time. In my view a good quality camera should last a good deal longer than 5 years, but would be grateful to know what others think.

I'd be prepared to accept some loss for wear and tear. The user manual provides no guide as to expected lifespan. The camera wasn't used that intensively: a few times a year for holidays, special occasions that's all.

Sadly, I don't think there is much point in pursuing this. Canon no longer make cameras as low grade as this (although admittedly it was quite innovative in its time). A four mega pixel camer today can be bought in a toy shop for a few pounds. My mobile phone's camera is five mega pixels and that came free with the contract. Flyboy10's Canon camera is eight mega pixels and cost twenty-five pounds.

Mids_Costcutter

neilmcl wrote: »

I think the consesus is that the camera has had a reasonable lifespan.

I've the exact same camera, roughly the same age, and I tried to use it last week for the first time in a while and it has exactly the same issue, the sensor has packed up. I've moved on I think you should probably do the same or take you chances with the courts, the choice is yours.

Reluctantly I have to agree with you that this claim is no longer worth pursuing.

Still I wonder though if people's expectation is that household electrical goods should have a shorter lifespan than they might have expected in the past? Or is that something that the manufacturers are helping to ensure?

fluffnutter

You'd accept 'some' loss for wear and tear? The SOGA does mention 'up to six years' as a period in which goods can be expected to last, depending on original cost. You could try to claim for one sixth I guess, seeing as it's lasted five years. That comes out at just over £23. And that's assuming the camera didn't fail due to misuse - something you may have to pay to prove. Is this really worth it?

neilmcl

Anyone seen OFT's new "SOGA Hub" - http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome

neilmcl

fluffnutter wrote: »

The SOGA does mention 'up to six years' as a period in which goods can be expected to last, depending on original cost.

I don't think it says that at all. It does provide you with 6 years to bring a case under the Act which may amount to the same thing though.

Flyboy152

neilmcl wrote: »

Anyone seen OFT's new "SOGA Hub" - http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome

Hey, that looks kind of cool. :cool:

TheSaint_2

Blimey - my Sony cost over £200 and lasted 13 months, I chalked it up to experience and decided not to buy sony again. Maybe I should have done the same as you - but I wouldnt do it after 5 years!!!

moonrakerz

fluffnutter wrote: »

The SOGA does mention 'up to six years' as a period in which goods can be expected to last, depending on original cost.

This is the sort of WRONG information which annoys me so much about many of the comments posted on here about SoGA !!!

SoGA does NOT mention any period of time which an item may be expected to last, nor does it refer to the cost - FULL STOP !

This just leads people to gain grossly exaggerated expectations about what they can expect - usually they just end up looking stupid !

shaun_from_Africa

This is the sort of WRONG information which annoys me so much about many of the comments posted on here about SoGA !!!

SoGA does NOT mention any period of time which an item may be expected to last, nor does it refer to the cost - FULL STOP !

Sale of goods act 1979 (section 14)

(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.