consumer rights on kenny

dubtom

I listened to the tail end of Pat kenny's show today and someone from consumer affairs was on.She stated that in the case of a complaint of a faulty product,the retailer,not manufactorer,is the person to see for a refund/repair ect within a time scale of two years.With this in mind,I traveled up to a local electric appliance shop where only last april 07 I purchased an oven,and last monday the front glass shattered. No rough play,no abuse,it just shattered.With my reciept in hand I told the assistant my story and included the bit I'd heard on pat kenny about it being their responsibilty,which, surprise surprise,was news to him. I left not with a new door but the number of whirlpool. I wasn't really surprised. What has surprised me after reading the sticky on consumer rights is the consumer affairs have no power,they can't force the vendor to abide by the law. If I want satisfaction I have to bring the vendor to court which begs the question for me,why have a consumer affairs at all. What use are they doing.Yes,I'm slightly more informed after listening to kenny,but I still got the same answer from the vendor that I would have got yesterday,which was basically,sling your hook lad you'll get no joy here,sucker. Why don't consumer affairs inforce the laws that they say are in place.All it would take would be one news worthy case where a vendor has been brought to court for flouting the law in regards to consumers rights and then given a hefty fine and the flood gates would open. Fear of litigation would force them to comply.Or am I way off the mark here. What use going on national radio,informing joe soap that yes,he should go back to the shop with his faulty goods,even after 2 years,and they know,and I know,that the vendor will just show them the door. This may sound like a bit of rant,but thats not intended,and tbh I don't know why I'm surprised that there is one more goverment agency that does nothing.

Sad Professor

I heard a bit of this this morning as well. The woman was Tina Leonard and (according to Google) she's director of the European Consumer Centre in Dublin. Now I don't claim to be an expert on consumer rights but I'm pretty damn sure that what she said about the 2 year guarantee is wrong — or at least it doesn't apply in Ireland.

Now I don't know if this has changed since I looked into it a few years ago but I read the newspaper everyday and have never come across anything. So I think this woman just got her facts wrong.

It is true that there was a European directive (called 1999/44/EC) several years ago that made retailers responsible for repairing faulty products etc for up to 2 years. However when that directive was translated and passed into Irish law in 2003 they left out the bit about the 2 year guarantee. I think this was to avoid upsetting retailers. Meaning we are still only covered by the Sales of Goods Act 1980 which makes the retailer liable for a "reasonable amount of time" which is generally accepted as being 1 year.

But when you buy something your contract is with the retailer not the manufacturer. So it's the retailer who is legally obliged to fix/replace your product. A manufacturers warranty is a separate thing. They are offered largely to take the burden of responsibility off retailers. But retailers have this idea in their head that they are off the hook after a year. Which isn't really true but the law is so vague that you'd probably have to take them to court to prove that a "reasonable amount of time" is more than a year. But there's nothing in Irish legislation that says they have to cover you for 2 years. Basically consumer law in this country needs major overhaul.

Frowzy

Dubtom,

The same thing happened a friend of mine, her oven door shattered too. She got no joy from the retailer or manufacturer as she was also over the year. But her house insurance coughed up.

Might be worth giving them a ring!

F

gerrycollins

Sad Professor wrote: »

I heard a bit of this this morning as well. The woman was Tina Leonard and (according to Google) she's director of the European Consumer Centre in Dublin. Now I don't claim to be an expert on consumer rights but I'm pretty damn sure that what she said about the 2 year guarantee is wrong — or at least it doesn't apply in Ireland.

Now I don't know if this has changed since I looked into it a few years ago but I read the newspaper everyday and have never come across anything. So I think this woman just got her facts wrong.

It is true that there was a European directive (called 1999/44/EC) several years ago that made retailers responsible for repairing faulty products etc for up to 2 years. However when that directive was translated and passed into Irish law in 2003 they left out the bit about the 2 year guarantee. I think this was to avoid upsetting retailers. Meaning we are still only covered by the Sales of Goods Act 1980 which makes the retailer liable for a "reasonable amount of time" which is generally accepted as being 1 year.

But when you buy something your contract is with the retailer not the manufacturer. So it's the retailer who is legally obliged to fix/replace your product. A manufacturers warranty is a separate thing. They are offered largely to take the burden of responsibility off retailers. But retailers have this idea in their head that they are off the hook after a year. Which isn't really true but the law is so vague that you'd probably have to take them to court to prove that a "reasonable amount of time" is more than a year. But there's nothing in Irish legislation that says they have to cover you for 2 years. Basically consumer law in this country needs major overhaul.

bang on and I'm a retailer its just so confusing,also OP there might be a chance genuninely(?)that the glass is not covered similar to that the light bulb would not be covered.small chance of that I hope

Gillo

It may be worth considering OP that the retailer is going to refer the matter to whirlpool, so you (may) have the right to demand the retailer solves the issue it's often a lot easier to go straight to whirlpool and cut out the middle man.

G200

Have a 14 month old PS3. Blu ray drive packed in 2 days ago. Sony will repair and charge for it. Going to go to Xtravision (where I bought it) and try and assert my EU rights. Will keep you posted.

Cheers

G

Sad Professor

G200 wrote: »

Have a 14 month old PS3. Blu ray drive packed in 2 days ago. Sony will repair and charge for it. Going to go to Xtravision (where I bought it) and try and assert my EU rights. Will keep you posted.

Don't mention anything about EU rights or Pat Kenny. As I posted earlier the 2 year thing doesn't apply here. Just argue that under the Sales of Goods Act 1980 they have to repair/replace a faulty product within the reasonable lifetime of that product. Which in the case of a PS3, I think we can all agree should be more than 14 months. Try and talk to a manager. Don't let them fob you off that it's Sony's responsibility—it isn't.

If that fails, you may have to put it in writing and threaten them with a small claims court.

G200

Got on to Sony. They are going to replace it apparently for free even though it is out of warranty. I'll believe it when I see it!

G

Flaccus

Sad Professor wrote: »

I heard a bit of this this morning as well.
It is true that there was a European directive (called 1999/44/EC) several years ago that made retailers responsible for repairing faulty products etc for up to 2 years. However when that directive was translated and passed into Irish law in 2003 they left out the bit about the 2 year guarantee. I think this was to avoid upsetting retailers.

The EU thing does apply here but it's not 2 years. The 2 year bit was left out as we are one of the only countries who enjoy up to 6 years cover with certain conditions attached!! This is all down to the Staute of Limitations which has added protection over any EU directive. Within the first six months of the guarantee any lack of conformity shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery, unless proved otherwise. Within two years from delivery of the goods the trader can still be held liable for any lack of conformity. However, it is then up to the consumer to prove that the lack of conformity existed at the time of delivery. Usually a known flaw or manufacturers defect has to be proven.

In Ireland the implementation of Directive 1999/44/EC is in addition to existing protection granted by the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 and the Unfair Terms Regulations 1995. Under the Statute of limitations, the trader can be held liable for up to six years for lack of conformity of the product. Anyone working in the National Consumer Agency should know this. Of course the problem then can become proving the item should have lasted more than 2 years. At the end of day if the trader won't play ball you may end up going to the small claims court

G200

Email from Sony came in this afternoon, I am suppose to go to Xtravision in 2 days time and pick up a (new) refurbed unit. Result!!!!

There must be something in this 2 year thing after all.

Cheers

G

Sad Professor

The protection is there alright but it's far too vague. Retailers shouldn't be in any doubt of their legal obligation to provide replacement/repair for faulty items. The fact that so many of them will try and argue that it's nothing to do with them after 30 days or a year is ridiculous. They're thriving on the confusion. The legislation needs to be simplified so consumers can be in no doubt of their rights.

boopolo

G200 wrote: »

Got on to Sony. They are going to replace it apparently for free even though it is out of warranty. I'll believe it when I see it!

G

From what I hear, the PStation service division are quiet good at Sony unlike their other divisions.


Boo

antoinolachtnai

There are a few things here.

1. Some of the UK chains have appointed the manufacturers as their service agents. This allows them a legal way to pass the buck temporarily. I do not know if they do this here.

2. There is a reality check to be done here. I know it is the law and the responsibility is on retailers, but stuff like consumer electronics and white goods are now very cheap. There is little enough margin in the business. Quality of goods is actually quite good considering how cheap they are. It's hard to do the proper support/after-sales service for the money. This is why dell get nobbled. But the reality is that consumers are very focused on price.

I am not making any excuses for anyone. But we do have to be realistic about how much it costs to provide service.

dubtom

I phoned up Whirlpool fully expecting to get the out of warrenty speech but was surprised when I explained what happened that they asked was anyone hurt:eek:they then gave me a service number and said I'd be contacted shortly by a service exec. I may well get the speel and a huge quote from him but I'm pleasently surprised that they didn't fob me off. It remains to be seen what will happen.Perhaps the model I have has a history of exploding glass.

MOH

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I am not making any excuses for anyone. But we do have to be realistic about how much it costs to provide service.

In fairness, for electronic goods that are treated properly, it costs nothing to provide service if the product is made properly in the first place.

Flaccus

Sad Professor wrote: »

The protection is there alright but it's far too vague. Retailers shouldn't be in any doubt of their legal obligation to provide replacement/repair for faulty items. The fact that so many of them will try and argue that it's nothing to do with them after 30 days or a year is ridiculous. They're thriving on the confusion. The legislation needs to be simplified so consumers can be in no doubt of their rights.

I agree entirely. The law is not clear cut in these matters, open to interpretation, and the burden of proof is on the buyer very often. Plus alot of retailers don't even know or refuse to accept consumers rights and stick to the 30 day, 3 months, 1 year etc company line.

From my own experience, in 2 instances where the retailer wouldn't budge I ended up going to the small claims court and winning. In one case it was a known fault with the product in question which reared it's ugly head after about 14 months but the retailer and manufacturer wanted to charge for a repair as it was more than 1 year old. So the usual thing applied about expecting a product to have a reasonable live span (sale of goods), and the eu directive about non-confirmance within 2 years having to be brought back into conformance if there is a known defect. Luckily I was able to gather enough data online about the particular fault with this product. In the 2nd case the product was over 2 years old, and the onus was on me to prove again under the eu legislation that the product can be reasonably expected to have a life span of more than 2 years. Usually though from what I've seen the judge will give his personal view on this and rule on it. In this instance the retailer would not confirm the life expetancy, so it was ruled in my favour anyway. I reckon as long as you know your legal entitlements, can articulate them and more importantly can prove to the judge you're in the right, it should go your way. Of course it's a last resort, and lots of people would not dream of taking things so far regardless.

dubtom

Just an update on my oven door. Got a call today from whirlpool to say they had my glass and it was covered under warrenty,even though I didn't send the card in originally. Sent down an installer which cost €70 and another €26 to get an extra 61/2 years parts warrenty. Although I'd rather have not paid anything:rolleyes: the installer said the glass usually cost €150. So looking on the bright side I wouldn't have paid €220 to get the glass fixed,I would have just dumped it and bought a new one, so on the whole I'm quids ahead. In my next life I want to be a man who fixes machines for whirlpool,at €70 for 15 minutes work I'd be a rich man.