Faulty replacement Kindle Fire after 11 months - "buy a new one"

wealdroam

DeathMuffin wrote: »

Anyway, let's say hypothetically that the original device was found (faulty) on the street and was registered to my account. Are the manufacturers then not responsible in any way? Not hypothetically, Amazon replaced that device as faulty within 7 months. Is a contract implied there? Is it not reasonable to expect that replacement to function for as long as a year?

A manufacturer does not owe any owner of any of their products anything beyond that specified in their warranty/guarantee.

In your scenario the manufacturer would've replaced the first faulty device out of goodwill.

I've yet to see a warranty that restarts when a product is replaced. The replacement device either continues with the original warranty term or a short term, say three months, warranty is offered on the repair/replacement.

Whether you think it is reasonable for a replacement product to last a year or not is immaterial. A manufacturer's warranty/guarantee is in addition to any statutory rights you may have, and as such can include terms like "this warranty only applies to the original purchaser", or "this warranty expires three months from purchase".

And we have already established that you have no statutory rights to any further repair or replacement.

unholyangel

DeathMuffin wrote: »

OK, the car analogy was a mistake. My point was that the reasonable possibility of use of the fuel depends on the garage having fixed the car as agreed, which they didn't.

Anyway, let's say hypothetically that the original device was found (faulty) on the street and was registered to my account. Are the manufacturers then not responsible in any way? Not hypothetically, Amazon replaced that device as faulty within 7 months. Is a contract implied there? Is it not reasonable to expect that replacement to function for as long as a year?

As I said, no consideration = no contract = no legal obligation.

Even if amazon had sent you the kindle as a gift themselves, they would have zero liability if the goods became faulty.

If you did find it in the street and registered it to your account (which would be the criminal offence of theft btw) no the manufacturer arent responsible in any way to you. Nor is the retailer. The retailer entered into a contract with the purchaser, not you. Even if you had purchased it, the retailer would be entitled to see proof of purchase (as its proof there is a contract and thus they have legal obligations to you). It doesn't need to be a receipt but it does need to be something to prove that you have a contract with them for the goods in question.

It really is that simple.

DeathMuffin

Thanks for that. Just so I'm clear, the upshot here is that without proof of the original purchase, the owner of a device has no statutory rights? If so, is this definitely the case where only one company manufactures and supports the device, and requires serial registration in order to use it?

Are all the people who were gifted Kindles protected by Amazon's own terms only?

unforeseen

Recourse would be through the retailer.
Kindle and Fire are available to by from the likes of Tesco etc.
First off you need to find out where it was bought. Then you need to find out whether the person who bought 8t still has proof of purchase. However as it was a gift YOU still don't have any rights, the purchaser may though.

theonlywayisup

unforeseen wrote: »

Recourse would be through the retailer.
Kindle and Fire are available to by from the likes of Tesco etc.
First off you need to find out where it was bought. Then you need to find out whether the person who bought 8t still has proof of purchase. However as it was a gift YOU still don't have any rights, the purchaser may though.

Gift? With the hypothetical situation given earlier, it could be the item is actually stolen property.

wealdroam

DeathMuffin wrote: »

Thanks for that. Just so I'm clear, the upshot here is that without proof of the original purchase, the owner of a device has no statutory rights?

Yes, that's right.

DeathMuffin wrote: »

If so, is this definitely the case where only one company manufactures and supports the device, and requires serial registration in order to use it?

Yes, that's also correct.

DeathMuffin wrote: »

Are all the people who were gifted Kindles protected by Amazon's own terms only?

If you mean "is the only recourse they have is via Amazon's warranty" then yes you have got that right too.
But do remember that in this case the original purchaser does have statutory rights, so the gift recipient could seek help via the purchaser.

There are also "gift receipts" and the like, but as you can't even remember where the thing came from, I'll leave that for another time.

unholyangel

DeathMuffin wrote: »

Thanks for that. Just so I'm clear, the upshot here is that without proof of the original purchase, the owner of a device has no statutory rights? If so, is this definitely the case where only one company manufactures and supports the device, and requires serial registration in order to use it?

Are all the people who were gifted Kindles protected by Amazon's own terms only?

Them making something does not create any liability between them and you if the goods do not conform to contract - because there is no contract.

Specifically, consumer statutory rights are there to allow consumers to enforce terms of the contract - that goods must match their description/sample (if a sale by sample), be of satisfactory quality and give the consumer remedies if the goods do not conform to contract.


If there is no contract, the goods can't fail to conform to something that doesn't exist therefore you have no consumer rights.

wealdroam

DeathMuffin wrote: »

I feel I'm reaching here but does the fact of registration make a difference? It can be shown that the device is authentic and that it was purchased and when, just not necessarily by me.

It changes nothing.

You need to clearly understand the different responsibilities that the seller and the manufacturer have.
Registration is likely to be with the manufacturer.
The manufacturer's warranty is likely to state that the original purchase receipt must be shown.
That is perfectly in order. As I said earlier, manufacturer's warranties can include such restrictions.

However, registering the product could go some way to providing proof of purchase when seeking a remedy with the seller using your statutory rights under The Sale of Goods Act or Consumer Rights Act.

DeathMuffin wrote: »

If I took a Sony TV to a Sony shop (for simplicity say the model is new this week) without a receipt and demonstrated a fault, I'd expect Sony to take some kind of action even though I could have bought it elsewhere. Would that decision come solely down to Sony's policies, or are there statutory obligations?

You are clouding the waters here.

Firstly Sony shops aren't owned by Sony. They are typically franchises.

Sony the manufacturer, or even the Sony Shop the franchisee, may well help you in that situation, but you have absolutely no right to insist on that help.

As Unholyangel said, there is no contract.

susancs

OP, keep an eye on Amazon deals as they often have refurbs of newer Kindle Fire models than yours and although nearly the price of a new one currently they go down (and up).
Eg,
Sold for £16.09 on Amazon a month ago.
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/used-good-fire-hd-7-7-hd-display-wi-fi-16-gb-white-includes-special-offers-bargain-2501450

Sold for £23.86 last week on Amazon warehouse.
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/used-good-fire-hd-6-6-hd-display-wi-fi-8-gb-cobalt-includes-special-offers-via-amazon-2518961

DeathMuffin

Thanks for the clarification.

For the record, the device was not stolen. It was definitely bought either by or for me.

I understand the argument that there's no contract for the sale of the Kindle, but what about the Coins? I definitely bought them personally, using the same device I intended to spend them on. If they are goods then I do have rights under SOGA, correct? If I can prove an inherent fault in what Amazon knows is the only supported device that I own, can they be considered not fit for purpose?

Edit: Thanks wealdroam. I deleted that post because I was answered while I wrote it, and as you say it only muddies the waters