Warranty Limitations

Keycare

Hi,

I purchased a part for my car from a supplier that specialises supplying reconditioned parts. The part that was supplied turned out to be faulty, it was removed, returned to the supplier and a replacement provided (within 3 months).

The question I have is; the terms of the warranty for the part states that "(Supplier)
will not be held liable for any costs incurred during fitment, removal or operation of any parts. Warranty Claims are limited to the cost of original purchase."

Clearly, if the part supplied is faulty, it needs to be removed and returned to the supplier and the new part fitted. At significant cost to the purchaser, these costs are excluded from the warranty.

Are these terms/limitations 'unfair'?

Thanks.

JJ_Egan

Warranty is that from the manufacturer or is the supplier the manufacturer ??
Warranty allowed to have terms and conditions .
Consumer Rights your rights under the law against the vendor .

Keycare

The supplier is the re-manufacturer if that makes sense. I understand that a warranty is allowed to have terms and conditions, the question is do they fall foul of the unfair terms of the CCA 2915?

The part must be installed/fitted. Therefore the part has to be removed for it to be inspected/replaced under the warranty, is it fair that the warranty excludes the cost of removal, return to the supplier and refitting of the replacement part when the part is shown to have a defect?

Cheers.

DoaM

Did you return the part knowingly under the terms of the warranty, or did you specifically return using your consumer rights?

Yes it is fair for a warranty to exclude consequential costs. Even consumer rights don't automatically allow you to claim consequential costs. The seller must bear any costs in providing the remedy (return, repair, delivery) but costs for removal and re-fitting are not automatic rights. You may be able to sue them to recover such costs though.

unholyangel

I wouldnt say these are consequential losses though.

IMO it would be obvious to the world at large that that type of loss would be a likely consequence of the breach therefore it would be a direct loss and not a consequential loss.

As for the warranty, the important point here is that the warranty cannot be used to restrict or remove statutory rights - as then it would be a guarantee operating as an exclusion clause which is likely to be blacklisted as an unfair term and may amount to a criminal offence.

steampowered

A warranty is always optional, and additional to your consumer rights.

As such the warranty can cover or not cover particular costs at the supplier's discretion.

Therefore, if you want to recover these costs, you would need to try and claim them under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 rather than under the warranty.