EU Directive 1999/44/EC Two-year warranty

Glynn.Alexander

I thought it useful to post this, it is in regards to when you purchase products at shops and they claim that you need to pay for the repair if the product is just over a year old.

As most of us here are probably aware there is a UK law known as The Consumer Rights Act 2015 amongst others, this stipulates that if your product is over 6 months old, any repairs that may need to be done needs to be proven by you to be a manufacturer fault before the retailer is obliged to repair or replace the product.

Having had an issue with Curries recently I was told that my 15-month-old headphones were out of warranty and they will not fix them unless I prove to them that this is a manufacturer issue.

Enter EU Directive 1999/44/EC, this directive states 'A two-year guarantee applies for the sale of all consumer goods everywhere in the EU. In some countries, this may be more, and some manufacturers also choose to offer a longer warranty period.' there is no requirement for you to prove that the damage was caused by the manufacturer.

There are only a few conditions

• The goods were purchased no longer than two years ago
• The store will not provide a refund or repair because you are returning the item after their return period has ended, usually one year
• You are reporting the fault within two months of discovering it
• The goods show no signs of damage through your actions or misuse.

Secondly in the UK Since 1972, when Parliament passed the European Communities Act if there is a conflict between national law and European law, the UK courts have to give priority to European law meaning that EU directive 1999/44/EC supersedes the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 and any other consumer law currently enforced throughout the UK.

Of course, as expected in my case Curries have tried to fob me off, so after curries have been given reasonable time to respond I will follow this on with the European Small Claims Procedure should they choose not to repair/replace or refund me for my damaged purchase, one that cost me £200.00 and they were trying to charge me £60 to repair. e-justice.europa.eu/content_small_claims-42-en.do

I hope this information is useful to some out there, it will certainly scare the retailers if more and more people quoted this directive rather than the limited Consumer Rights Act.

KeithP

Sadly you are mistaken.

Your understanding of 'warranty' is different to that used in that Directive.

That Directive states that each member state must allow a consumer at least two years to seek a remedy from a trader.

In the UK (England and Wales at least) a consumer has six years to seek such a remedy.

Hope that helps.

societys_child

Just to add, 2 years or 6 years, it's NOT a warranty or guarantee.
It means, in the UK, you have 6 years to legally pursue the retailer, if you can show for example that the goods were faulty at the time of purchase.
It's in no way a guarantee.


Cost and life expectancy come into it as well, you wont get far in court complaining, for example, that your £5 kettle only lasted two and a half years.

bris

You need to prove why they are faulty due to an inherent fault. The EU directive doesn't mean anything like you think it does.

JJ_Egan

Some one posts this every six months or so .
Yet to see any poster actually follow the threat to go via ESCP .

robatwork

You'd better hurry on getting them into the European Small Claims Procedure...clock's a tickin'

Glynn.Alexander

Your understanding of 'warranty' is different to that used in that Directive.

I know that warranty is different to a directive, it is a consumer right that supersedes the UK consumer rights and again, I am aware of the 6 year rule too, but you seem to be mising the most important part, that you do not have to prove the fault was there prior to purchase.

You need to prove why they are faulty due to an inherent fault. The EU directive doesn't mean anything like you think it does.

No you don't not with this directive

You'd better hurry on getting them into the European Small Claims Procedure...clock's a tickin'

actually no, it is not ticking at all, the reason is quite clear, the UK will adopt EU laws when we leave and only then remove them one by one, so of coure eventually they may get around to this, but not quite as fast as you are implying

An article that debuks some of the myths you have claimed here thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1677034/Two-year-warranty-EU-law.html

wealdroam

So how are you going to progress this with Currys?

Do you understand that an EU Directive just instructs the member states to incorporate the substance of that Directive into their local laws?

The UK has done this. It was incorporated firstly into the Sale of Goods Act and subsequently into The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and The Consumer Right Act 2015.

As said above - you are very much mistaken.

Do you believe everything you read in The Daily Mail?

Glynn.Alexander

Firstly Wealdroam, the EU Directive exists and it says nothing about incorporating the substance, it is a directive in its own right that supercedes National law, maybe if you think it only means 'incorporating the substance' you could point out in the directive where it states that, otherwise I would say you are simply peeing in the wind.

Secondly, maybe instead of trying to insult people, you should check the facts for yourself, I have read the directive, that is how I know it says nothing about 'incorporating substance'. I would recommend you {Edited by Forum Team} read what I put above again...

UK courts have to give priority to European law meaning that EU directive 1999/44/EC supersedes the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002

Despite retailer claims (as if they can be trusted to tell the truth), this means you can go to an EU court and win!

[Deleted User]

Glynn.Alexander wrote: »

Firstly Wealdroam, the EU Directive exists and it says nothing about incorporating the substance, it is a directive in its own right that supercedes National law, maybe if you think it only means 'incorporating the substance' you could point out in the directive where it states that, otherwise I would say you are simply peeing in the wind.

Secondly, maybe instead of trying to insult people, you should check the facts for yourself, I have read the directive, that is how I know it says nothing about 'incorporating substance'. I would recommend you wind that neck in a bit and read what I put above again...


Despite retailer claims (as if they can be trusted to tell the truth), this means you can go to an EU court and win!

So you have the funds to sue them through the entire British Court system do you? Which is what you must do before taking them to the EU Court, which again you need funding for.

DoaM

Glynn.Alexander wrote: »

Firstly Wealdroam, the EU Directive exists and it says nothing about incorporating the substance, it is a directive in its own right that supercedes National law

Are you sure?

The EU themselves say:

Directives
A "directive" is a legislative act that sets out a goal that all EU countries must achieve. However, it is up to the individual countries to devise their own laws on how to reach these goals. One example is the EU consumer rights directive, which strengthens rights for consumers across the EU, for example by eliminating hidden charges and costs on the internet, and extending the period under which consumers can withdraw from a sales contract.