Is a product guarantee 2 years or 6 years?

Cheekbones1

I have two products that have failed after the two-year guarantee:

a FitBit One £59.99 step tracker bought new from John Lewis online April 2014
a Vodafone SureSignal booster £50 bought new from Vodafone online Oct 2012

So, as I was reluctant to spend £££ buying them again, out of curiosity, I contacted both companies and asked for replacement.

This was based on my understanding that products should reasonably last for 6 years.

Both companies said 'no way'. Vodafone suggested I take the SureSignal box to a shop to see if could be repaired and FitBit just said 'go away'.

Do I have a leg to stand on? Can I push and say that the items MUST be replaced because they are less than 6 years old?

There is a larger issue as well - I work as IT support for individuals, and am constantly having to tell them to buy new kit e.g. routers, after a relatively short period of time. It would help to have a definitive answer about what we can reasonably expect from equipment.

DCFC79

You need proof the item was inherently faulty when you bought them, you can get this from a suitable person who works in that field to do the report so the sure signal box an electronics engineer maybe.

Fosterdog

Have a read of the consumer rights guide here http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange

A product guarantee and your consumer rights are two different things, a guarantee doesn't have to be provided at all but is usually added as a point of good customer service by the manufacturer.

There is no rule that states how long something has to last, only that it lasts a reasonable amount of time, which will depend on the item and a number of other factors. These can include price, intended use, maintainance, external factors, and many more.

Working in IT (as I also do) you will know that technology is moving forward at an alarmingly fast rate, nothing can be made future proof as there is no way of knowing where the technology will be in 6 months time let alone 6 years time. It would be unreasonable to expect an outdated and now obsolete piece of technology to still be suitable for current demands. Other types of items would have different expectations but anything to do with technology is already old by the time it reaches the shops and in just a few months time there will be something smaller, better, faster, and cheaper available.

Ultimately it is up to you to prove that the items haven't lasted as long as they should have (as they were purchased more than six months ago), you'd also have to prove that the reason for their failure was due to an inherent manufacturing fault rather than wear and tear or misuse. You would then have to claim from whoever sold them to you rather than the manufacturer.

Cheekbones1

Have a read of the consumer rights guide here Thank you, I will

A product guarantee and your consumer rights are two different things, a guarantee doesn't have to be provided at all but is usually added as a point of good customer service by the manufacturer. Really useful clarification, thank you

There is no rule that states how long something has to last, only that it lasts a reasonable amount of time, which will depend on the item and a number of other factors. These can include price, intended use, maintainance, external factors, and many more. So if my reasonable length of time is different to the manufacturer's, then it's stalemate? I also take it that because the guarantee is usually 1-2 years then that's what the manufacturer sees as reasonable...

Working in IT (as I also do ) you will know that technology is moving forward at an alarmingly fast rate, nothing can be made future proof as there is no way of knowing where the technology will be in 6 months time let alone 6 years time. It would be unreasonable to expect an outdated and now obsolete piece of technology to still be suitable for current demands. Absolutely, and this is a conversation I have on many occasions with my lovely clients Other types of items would have different expectations but anything to do with technology is already old by the time it reaches the shops and in just a few months time there will be something smaller, better, faster, and cheaper available. But the majority of my clients are reluctant to replace equipment, even when it doesn't work well anymore because of exactly that point.

Ultimately it is up to you to prove that the items haven't lasted as long as they should have I can't see how I could do this, as there is no agreement on the 'should' (as they were purchased more than six months ago), you'd also have to prove that the reason for their failure was due to an inherent manufacturing fault rather than wear and tear or misuse again, I can't see how I could do this. You would then have to claim from whoever sold them to you rather than the manufacturer.

Thank you so, so much for this really useful reply. It still leaves me with the situation that I can't see how I can prove that something should have lasted longer, and, leaving aside the technology constantly updating part of the argument, all I can think of is that I need to accept that the longest any manufacturer is willing to guarantee a product is 2 years.

sheramber

To claim under the Consumer Rights Act your claim is against the seller not the manufacturer.

powerful_Rogue

Cheekbones1 wrote: »

Have a read of the consumer rights guide here Thank you, I will

A product guarantee and your consumer rights are two different things, a guarantee doesn't have to be provided at all but is usually added as a point of good customer service by the manufacturer. Really useful clarification, thank you

There is no rule that states how long something has to last, only that it lasts a reasonable amount of time, which will depend on the item and a number of other factors. These can include price, intended use, maintainance, external factors, and many more. So if my reasonable length of time is different to the manufacturer's, then it's stalemate? I also take it that because the guarantee is usually 1-2 years then that's what the manufacturer sees as reasonable...

Working in IT (as I also do ) you will know that technology is moving forward at an alarmingly fast rate, nothing can be made future proof as there is no way of knowing where the technology will be in 6 months time let alone 6 years time. It would be unreasonable to expect an outdated and now obsolete piece of technology to still be suitable for current demands. Absolutely, and this is a conversation I have on many occasions with my lovely clients Other types of items would have different expectations but anything to do with technology is already old by the time it reaches the shops and in just a few months time there will be something smaller, better, faster, and cheaper available. But the majority of my clients are reluctant to replace equipment, even when it doesn't work well anymore because of exactly that point.

Ultimately it is up to you to prove that the items haven't lasted as long as they should have I can't see how I could do this, as there is no agreement on the 'should' (as they were purchased more than six months ago), you'd also have to prove that the reason for their failure was due to an inherent manufacturing fault rather than wear and tear or misuse again, I can't see how I could do this. You would then have to claim from whoever sold them to you rather than the manufacturer.

Thank you so, so much for this really useful reply. It still leaves me with the situation that I can't see how I can prove that something should have lasted longer, and, leaving aside the technology constantly updating part of the argument, all I can think of is that I need to accept that the longest any manufacturer is willing to guarantee a product is 2 years.

You have 6 years to take action against a retailer.

An independent report would establish whether an item is inherently faulty or not. An example would be poor soldering at the time of production etc. You would have to pay for this report, and if it found in your favour the cost would be refunded from the retailer, along with a remedy for the faulty product. This could be repair/refund or replace. In your case (if the report was in your favour) they would probably choose refund as it can be reduced for the use you have had, and that would be the cheapest remedy for them. I would expect nothing back for the suresignal and maybe a couple of quid for the fitbit.

As for what a reasonable time would be, well thats open to interpretation.

However, I would personally say your sure signal has lasted longer then it probably should. You've had it for 5 years, and im presuming in that time it was been plugged in and switched on 24/7. So that's less then 3p per day for it use.

A £60 fitbit one lasting for 3 years, that also seems pretty reasonable to me.

DoaM

And just to clarify the 6* years point ... that's merely the Statute of Limitations - the time within which you can bring a claim for breach of contract etc. (e.g. if goods fail) and still have a chance of a valid claim.

(You can bring a claim after 6 years bu the other party can simply bring up the SoL point and any claim would fail).

* 6 years from date of contract in the rest of the UK, 5 years from discovery in Scotland.

societys_child

And just to clarify the 6* years point ... that's merely the Statute of Limitations

And to make it even more clear for the OP, it's not a 6 year guarantee (or even two years)

Cheekbones1

You are all complete stars - thank you so much!

For what it's worth, I agree that the SureSignal lasting 5 years is a minor miracle, but I would have expected more than 3 years from the FitBit.

All this information is really helpful, and how I understand it, is that I should take it as a bonus if anything mass-produced and not too expensive lats longer than two years. My older clients find this really distressing, as they expect things to both last a long time and to be repairable...

Thank you all again for taking the time to pass on your words of wisdom; greatly appreciated.

paddyrg

Cheekbones1 wrote: »

For what it's worth, I agree that the SureSignal lasting 5 years is a minor miracle, but I would have expected more than 3 years from the FitBit.

All this information is really helpful, and how I understand it, is that I should take it as a bonus if anything mass-produced and not too expensive lats longer than two years. My older clients find this really distressing, as they expect things to both last a long time and to be repairable...

I think the point is that of you spend £1000 on a Cisco rack-mount unit you have a different reasonable expectation than a £50 plastic thingy where it has been built down to a price. Best advise clients that you can either use cheap domestic quality stuff that needs to be replaced every 2 years or so, or commercial quality which will last a lot longer and be repairable, but pay the price to do so. Some clients will need the reliability and pay, others need the cash and not. The ones who want professional quality at consumer prices will be the disappointed ones.