Directive 1999/44/EC

bris

It is the same, all of the EU countries have the same law, including us, but each individual country can go beyond that like we do in the UK.
The burden is on the consumer every where in the EU after 6 months.


The EU and us of course want rights to protect us against shoddy goods, but they won't go as far as to give us all free refunds up to 2 years after purchase for anyone who decides to break a product just to get a refund or replacement.

boatman

Could the fact that a seller demands an engineers report before offering to fix something be considered as delaying tactics, or a significant inconvenience to the consumer?

neilmcl

boatman wrote: »

Could the fact that a seller demands an engineers report before offering to fix something be considered as delaying tactics, or a significant inconvenience to the consumer?

No.

Do you have a specific issue in mind that you want to share?

boatman

neilmcl wrote: »

No.

Do you have a specific issue in mind that you want to share?

No, just from previous experience of having to jump through hoops. It all takes time.

peachyprice

boatman wrote: »

Could the fact that a seller demands an engineers report before offering to fix something be considered as delaying tactics, or a significant inconvenience to the consumer?

How is it a delaying tactic when you are in control of obtaining the report? Surely it would be far more inconvenient for the retailer to make arrangements for an appointment on your behalf?

boatman

peachyprice wrote: »

How is it a delaying tactic when you are in control of obtaining the report?

By asking for a report in the first place, they could accept your complaint and go straight for a repair, save time.

marliepanda

boatman wrote: »

By asking for a report in the first place, they could accept your complaint and go straight for a repair, save time.

How many people would abuse this?

boatman

marliepanda wrote: »

How many people would abuse this?

Having received the goods back they get to inspect them, can always refuse at that point, as a consumer can only hope they are honest at that point. The larger retailers are in a better position and yet they are the ones who seem to cause the most problems, at least looking on these boards that appears to be the case.

unholyangel

boatman wrote: »

You may well need to go to court to get the report refunded, hopefully it doesn't get to having to get a report in the first place!

I'm not expecting to present a trashed item and expecting them to fix it, but really wanted to know if you have to jump through the same hoops in France for example as you would in UK. You always hope that a retailer would fix it within a 'reasonable' time without having to go to ADR or court. The way its written in 1999/44 comes across as a simple procedure, I guess the CRA on the surface looks the same..

The directive (along with others) is the primary legislation for our legislation. It will be the primary legislation behind the legislation in other european countries as well but like ours, it may deviate from the directive.

The 2 year period refers to a legal warranty - the time you have to take legal action against the trader. It doesn't relate to how long goods should last. As other posters have explained, in england you have 6 years from entering the contract to take legal action (in scottish law its 5 years from discovery of the breach) so its much longer than the 2 years the directive needed to be satisfied.

Of course the retailer can be more forthcoming if they wish, but the way the law works is that its for the party alleging breach of contract to prove that breach (and the other party have no obligation to help you do so). The 6 month rule is a sort of exception to that, in that if the goods don't conform (which you may still have to prove) then the law assumes its a breach of contract.

boatman wrote: »

Could the fact that a seller demands an engineers report before offering to fix something be considered as delaying tactics, or a significant inconvenience to the consumer?

Theres no official requirement for an independent report. The requirement is for you to prove they're in breach - it just so happens the easiest way to do this is usually via independent report (stating something like the unit failed prematurely due to poor soldering).

Until you prove they have breached the contract, they aren't liable to provide a remedy so no, it doesn't count as significant inconvenience.


If a supplier came to you and said you were in breach of contract, you owe them £500, would you just take them at their word and pay? Or would you want some sort of proof that the money was actually owed? This is essentially no different.

peachyprice

boatman wrote: »

Having received the goods back they get to inspect them, can always refuse at that point, as a consumer can only hope they are honest at that point. The larger retailers are in a better position and yet they are the ones who seem to cause the most problems, at least looking on these boards that appears to be the case.

And if the retailer insisted the item was damaged by you? By obtaining your own independent report you are protected from retailers claiming the item was damaged not faulty.

But hey, if you think it's a good idea to lose that protection..........