Fixed use items and SOGA refunds

InsideInsurance

A hypothetical question for those more in the know than me.

The SOGA allows a deduction to be made on a refund for use already received from an item that subsequently is returned as faulty etc. For things we always have like TVs, sofas etc this makes sense as realistically we were always going to have to buy another at some point.

Are there any special allowances made however for things that really are meant to be a one off purchase/ something with a limited use period?

For example, you have a cot that breaks after 18 months. You have no other babies and realistically you are only going to need one for another few months. The retailer however refunds minus 30% to represent use already received. You then have to buy a new one to get you over those last couple of months which has ultimately cost you 130% of the price because of the retailer selling you defective stock.

bod1467

It's no different ... same rules apply.

You could always buy a second hand cot to tide you over those final few months.

peachyprice

No...................

unholyangel

Or alternatively you could sell the replacement cot on to someone else to recoup that 30%.

InsideInsurance

unholyangel wrote: »

Or alternatively you could sell the replacement cot on to someone else to recoup that 30%.

As you could have sold the older one had it not gone faulty. Never looked into the secondhand cot market but I am not sure that a 6 month old -v- 24 month old cot would be priced that differently esp as they would tend to get the most wear when the kid is older rather than just a ball of meat that hardly moves

unholyangel

InsideInsurance wrote: »

As you could have sold the older one had it not gone faulty. Never looked into the secondhand cot market but I am not sure that a 6 month old -v- 24 month old cot would be priced that differently esp as they would tend to get the most wear when the kid is older rather than just a ball of meat that hardly moves

Suppose it depends how well it was taken care of. Some people buy expensive things then treat them like crap. Others take care of all their possessions, regardless of the pricetag.

System

Both my kids and my brother's kids used the same cot that we had as babies.

First used in 1954 last used in 1996. Just a new mattress and sometimes a paint job between kids. I don't think it would meet the safety regulations these days.

marliepanda

InsideInsurance wrote: »

For example, you have a cot that breaks after 18 months. You have no other babies and realistically you are only going to need one for another few months. The retailer however refunds minus 30% to represent use already received. You then have to buy a new one to get you over those last couple of months which has ultimately cost you 130% of the price because of the retailer selling you defective stock.

Will the store come and sterilise you to make sure you are true to your word of having no more children? :S

I dont understand how this has even come up as an issue...

bod1467

InsideInsurance wrote: »

A hypothetical question

Your responses suggest that this is more than just hypothetical.

InsideInsurance

bod1467 wrote: »

Your responses suggest that this is more than just hypothetical.

No, it is just hyperthetical. Thought process was triggered by the other person posting about their baby monitor breaking after a few years.

Dont have kids but was thinking getting a token refund for something, having to go buy a new one knowing you only need it for a few months would be a real pain.

Was going to give a non-kid related example but anything that quickly came to mind was a bit silly

My mind wanders a lot at times

keithdc

I think it is a really interesting question.


Not sure a cot is the best example, but the concept could apply to, say, personal health devices (eg dentures or supportive footwear) that could be used for a fixed period until a permanent fix is available.


I don't think it as simple as some people suggest.


Could easily be a law exam type-of question.