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

marliepanda

DeathMuffin wrote: »

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

You not having a device does not make them not fit for purpose.

If I buy a tank of petrol then crash my car afterwards, do I get my money for my petrol back?

The coins work. Your kindle doesn't. That, currently, is not amazon's fault.

wealdroam

DeathMuffin wrote: »

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?

Do you understand what an inherent fault is?

An inherent fault is a fault that existed at the time of the sale but may not have been apparent at that time.

Are you somehow suggesting that the coins (if they are indeed goods) were faulty at the time of sale?

I would suggest that the coins still conform to contract - just as they did on the day that you bought them.

It is your responsibility to maintain the platform where you intend using the coins.

This has been said before. Re-read post#8.

As you like analogies...
If I bought a tin of beans and then somehow burnt a hole in my only saucepan, are the beans now inherently faulty because I have no way to heat them?
(that's a rhetorical question, btw).

DeathMuffin

No, I'm saying that if an inherent fault exists in the device, the coins are unusable through no fault of mine.

To be clear: I know that without an inherent fault, this is entirely my problem. My question is, as I said, based on the assumption that I can prove an inherent fault.

I assure you I've carefully read each post in this thread. I don't appreciate being patronised because you misunderstood my question.

marliepanda wrote: »

If I buy a tank of petrol then crash my car afterwards, do I get my money for my petrol back?

I'd say my situation is more like if you give an attendant your keys to fill up while you're not there and you come back to a full tank in a car that no longer works.

marliepanda

When did Amazon have your Kindle when it stopped working? You had possession when it stopped working. They don't know that you didn't drop it, only you know that. And considering you don't even know how you got it, maybe you did drop it at some point and forgot that too.


You need to prove the fault was inherent. That is unlikely to be worth it on a device which people are saying you can buy from less than twenty quid.

DeathMuffin

daytona0 wrote: »

I think your problem is that, instead of coming up with a practical solution, you'd rather fight tooth and nail in a situation which is marginal at best.

I realise now that it looks that way, and I'm sorry that I've come across as antagonistic. What I want is the use of my purchases without having to spend more money, in a situation where I believe I was given faulty goods. I asked for advice because I want to know where the law stands in this situation and I value the opportunity to hear from someone with similar experiences or knowledge. I may have been ruder than I would like in response to replies which I felt had not taken my questions into account, so apologies to anyone offended. I thought marliepanda's car analogy was dismissively flippant so I suggested an alternative I thought was a bit more accurate, not claiming that it was actually a good one.

Thanks for your car analogy, daytona0. As much as I hate analogies I found it helpful and I think it showed that you understand my view. All I would argue is that the coins are not transferable by Amazon's terms so I really can't use them without further purchase. Would that make a difference?

I know most people reading this will be thinking I should just get over myself and get a new device but the truth is I don't want to use any Amazon devices or services any more. I've had too many small issues and my customer service experiences have generally been the opposite of helpful. I want to cut loose and forget but while I believe there's a chance I have a right to my coins I can't ignore it. The cash value may not be much but at what amount does it become not ok to just let them keep it?