Consumer rights regarding life span of equipment

fly-catchers

I recently saw Martin on his programme talking about how you can claim beyond any provide guarantee if a product fails to last a reasonable length of time. On Googling I found a reference to 6 years. So does that mean that if a piece of equipment lasts less than 6 years you can possibly claim for at least a repair FOC? Is 6 years the maximum if that is the case?

user1977

fly-catchers said:

I recently saw Martin on his programme talking about how you can claim beyond any provide guarantee if a product fails to last a reasonable length of time. On Googling I found a reference to 6 years. So does that mean that if a piece of equipment lasts less than 6 years you can possibly claim for at least a repair FOC? Is 6 years the maximum if that is the case?

Google better. There's a useful website not so far from here which explains it better:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange/#goods

Ergates

fly-catchers said:

I recently saw Martin on his programme talking about how you can claim beyond any provide guarantee if a product fails to last a reasonable length of time. On Googling I found a reference to 6 years. So does that mean that if a piece of equipment lasts less than 6 years you can possibly claim for at least a repair FOC? Is 6 years the maximum if that is the case?

Yes/No/It Depends.

What the legislation says is:

"(1)
Every contract to supply goods is to be treated as including a term that the quality of the goods is satisfactory.
(2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—
(a)any description of the goods,
(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and
(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).
(3)The quality of goods includes their state and condition; and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—
(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied;
(b)appearance and finish;
(c)freedom from minor defects;
(d)safety;
(e)durability."

I've bolded the relevant parts.  The 2nd bolded bit shows that durability is an aspect of being of satisfactory quality.  So things should last a reasonable length of time.

However, the first bolded part also says that things like price should be taken into consideration.

i.e. if you buy cheap tat, you can't expect it to last as long as higher quality goods.

You'll also see that there is no mention of an actual expected lifespan.  The 6 years figure that is often used is because 6 years is how long a contract of sale can be enforced once completed.  i.e. if something fails 6 years after you buy it, you can't force the retailer to do anything about it  So it's not that we expect things to only last 6 years, it's that 6 years is a minimum because this is the limit of your ability to enforce your consumer rights.

Addendum:  If something comes with a contract that offers e.g. 25 year guarantee, then that obviously goes beyond the 6 years - but only as per exactly what it states in the contract.

DullGreyGuy

fly-catchers said:

I recently saw Martin on his programme talking about how you can claim beyond any provide guarantee if a product fails to last a reasonable length of time. On Googling I found a reference to 6 years. So does that mean that if a piece of equipment lasts less than 6 years you can possibly claim for at least a repair FOC? Is 6 years the maximum if that is the case?

So... generally you will be making a claim against the retailer that the product they sold you had an inherent fault, was insufficiently durable etc. Inevitably that means it was like that when you bought it. 

To give people certainty, most countries have a law of limitations, a maximum amount of time someone can take to sue someone else. In England and Wales it's 6 years for simple contracts. For Scotland it's 5 years. 

The CRA itself, does put an overarching time limit on how long you can claim for but the law of limitations kicks in as above 6 years after the point of sale (because the problem was on day 1). 


That isn't to say you will win if you claim a £3 pair of flip-flops from Primark dont survive daily use for 5 years and 51 weeks. The law says it must be reasonably durable considering factors like what the item is, its price point etc. I think if you asked a relevant expert about your flip-flops they'd be amazed they'd lasted that long rather than saying they clearly weren't durable even considering the budget price. 


In the first instance it's down to the retailer if they want to repair, replace or refund, you can express a preference but they can ignore it if a different resolution is materially cheaper. It's worth noting that for a refund after 6 months (1 month for cars) the retailer is entitled to reduce a refund to reflect the use you had before it developed the problem.