Tablet replaced in warranty, now replacement failed.

DoaM

Then you thought wrong. Some leisure reading for you:


Consumer Rights Act 2015

Dean000000

but then, by your logic you could theoretically, you could then have an lifetime supply of kindles couldn't you? If they kept breaking after, say 20 months?

JJ_Egan

<But are not manufacturers obliged to provide some statutory warranty on a new bit of kit??


No obligation at all for any warranty .
Your statutory rights as per UK law is via Consumer Regulations against the vendor .

reg091

Dean000000 wrote: »

but then, by your logic you could theoretically, you could then have an lifetime supply of kindles couldn't you? If they kept breaking after, say 20 months?

I am not talking about the warranty. I am talking about some statutory right I thought we had to have a product replaced/repaired etc if it failed within "a period" of taking delivery. (Six months rings a bell, but I may be wrong on that).

Under the warranty yes, if it fails in 20 months then I would expect (and would get) a new one. but under some basic consumer rights if the replacement failed after 4 months I would expect a replacement as four months use doesn't seem reasonable to me.

If the replacements kept failing after four months then, yes, I could have a lifetime supply of Kindles IF the law says that I could reasonably expect a longer lifetime than four months.

JJ_Egan

CR yes 6 months from date of purchase onus is on the retailer .
Thats Dec 2016 + 6 months .
Thats not a replacement + 6 months more.


Your Consumer Rights still apply against the vendor but the onus is now on you to proof your points via an independant report .
Vendor is allowed to make a deduction for 20 months of usage.

neilmcl

reg091 wrote: »

But surely the warranty is specifically on that bit of hardware? Another way looking at is that once that hardware fails the warranty on it finishes (as you no longer have it what is the point of having any further warranty on it?). A replacement should come with its own warranty period I would think.

No, your warranty is attached to your original purchase, simple as that.

neilmcl

reg091 wrote: »

Four months in this case. I don't think the onus is on me if a product has failed within four months.

Wrong again. Your consumer rights, and any time limits, are to do with breaches of your original contract. The clock doesn't get reset once you get a replacement.

reg091

I understand what you are saying is the case, but surely that is just wrong! I thought the CRA was supposed to stop people palming shoddy goods off on you.

I suggest that the date you take delivery of a product should be when your rights start. I can't see that warranty periods, or date of purchase, should have any bearing on it. If you have a product that fails within an unreasonable timescale then the law should be on your side.

I fully understand from all your replies that that is not the case, so thanks for the info, but in my opinion it should be. I know, write to my MP.....

DoaM

We are explaining what the law actually says ... obviously you don't agree so this thread may as well close now else we'll just be going around in circles forever.

reg091

Yep. Thanks for all the info, I am enlightened.