Microsoft Ripping people off.

Kimbot

Folks, my brother has an xbox360 which has now RROD'd on him. Manufacter date is within the 3 years and guess what.... because its second hand Microsoft want to charge for the repair.

They say that all secondhand consoles are not covered by their extended 3 year repair. What can be done about this?? (Nobody in customer care will help us.)

MagicMarker

How are Microsoft ripping him off?

If that's their policy then anyone who buys second hand can't really complain, they buy at their own risk.

samhail

could see if who ever you bought it off would go to the trouble of going back to MS with it under warranty

WexCan

As far as I know they're perfectly within their rights to do this, given the age of the product and there's probably something in the terms and conditions of the warranty that mentions it.

How much are they charging?

mikemac

I got RROD last month.
Just inside the 3 year deadline and they repaired it no probs.

Actually, the one I got back is a few months newer, works fine and I'm happy

I bought it second hand but I didn't tell them. I wasn't trying to hide it, I don't think they even asked me and this thread is the first time I've seen this policy

Maybe ring again and see if they'll accept it this time.

Kimbot

MagicMarker wrote: »

How are Microsoft ripping him off?

If that's their policy then anyone who buys second hand can't really complain, they buy at their own risk.

Well Game and Smyths have both said that secondhand consoles are covered under the 3 year RROD warrenty. He bought it on that advise and then Microsoft want 80+ Euro for a repair!

samhail wrote: »

could see if who ever you bought it off would go to the trouble of going back to MS with it under warranty

Shop don't want to know about it, told him to go to MS.

WexCan wrote: »

As far as I know they're perfectly within their rights to do this, given the age of the product and there's probably something in the terms and conditions of the warranty that mentions it.

How much are they charging?

80+

Kimbot

mikemac wrote: »

I got RROD last month.
Just inside the 3 year deadline and they repaired it no probs.

Actually, the one I got back is a few months newer, works fine and I'm happy

I bought it second hand but I didn't tell them. I wasn't trying to hide it, I don't think they even asked me and this thread is the first time I've seen this policy

Maybe ring again and see if they'll accept it this time.

Someone had registered the console to themselves already so that is how they knew it was secondhand.

mickoneill30

jonny24ie wrote: »

Well Game and Smyths have both said that secondhand consoles are covered under the 3 year RROD warrenty. He bought it on that advise and then Microsoft want 80+ Euro for a repair!

Take it back to Game or Smyths then. You should have really checked with Microsoft if you were in doubt. Why check with a third party?

http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/support/warranty/warranty.htm
"This Limited Warranty applies to the original retail purchaser only and may not be assigned or transferred. However, some jurisdictions extend the protection of implied warranties to subsequent consumers and therefore this limitation may not apply to you."

It's common enough (but not commonly known). Read many warranty documents you get with electronic devices. A lot say the warranty is non transferable. With most devices you can get away with it if it's second hand. If the original owner registered the device then I'm not sure what you can do with Microsoft. If you bought it from Game or Smyths after they gave you that advice I'd be wandering down there with the console and receipt and tell them to sort it out.

Maybe if you bought it from a private seller you could give him a buzz and ask him to ring Microsoft for you. You could try spoofing Microsoft and say you're the original purchaser, you've just moved house but they'll probably ask for your password and if you don't know it they'll probably email it to the original purchaser.

Doctor DooM

mickoneill30 wrote: »

Take it back to Game or Smyths then. You should have really checked with Microsoft if you were in doubt. Why check with a third party?

http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/support/warranty/warranty.htm
"This Limited Warranty applies to the original retail purchaser only and may not be assigned or transferred. However, some jurisdictions extend the protection of implied warranties to subsequent consumers and therefore this limitation may not apply to you."

It's common enough (but not commonly known). Read many warranty documents you get with electronic devices. A lot say the warranty is non transferable. With most devices you can get away with it if it's second hand. If the original owner registered the device then I'm not sure what you can do with Microsoft. If you bought it from Game or Smyths after they gave you that advice I'd be wandering down there with the console and receipt and tell them to sort it out.

Maybe if you bought it from a private seller you could give him a buzz and ask him to ring Microsoft for you. You could try spoofing Microsoft and say you're the original purchaser, you've just moved house but they'll probably ask for your password and if you don't know it they'll probably email it to the original purchaser.

Regardless as the OP canot have any proof of purchase they basically have no rights here... I would agree that the best bet would be to play dumb, return it to a game or something and say you bought it there, as when they RMA it there should be no issue.

Thats if game or HMV or someone will take it back without a reciept.


Regardless OP: the title of this thread is misleading. Microsot legally don't have to lift a finger.

projectmayhem

SDooM wrote: »

when they RMA it .

Where do you work? No normies in the real world know acronyms like that

Doctor DooM

projectmayhem wrote: »

Where do you work? No normies in the real world know acronyms like that

I have worked in several retail positions, in both floor and management capacity. I have since escaped my customer based prison.

dudara

From the T&Cs posted by a previous poster, then it would appear that Microsoft have no liability with regard to secondhand merchandise.

You should have checked with Microsoft themselves prior to buying the x-box. I would not have trusted anyone else to tell me if the console was still covered under warranty.

As there is no warranty, they are entitled to chage you for repairs. They are not ripping people off.

KatCookie

Where do you work? No normies in the real world know acronyms like that

Its very common word when you are on the Creative forums & website... (mp3 players etc)
Just so you know!

Tomk1

SDooM wrote: »

Regardless as the OP canot have any proof of purchase they basically have no rights here... I would agree that the best bet would be to play dumb, return it to a game or something and say you bought it there, as when they RMA it there should be no issue.

Thats if game or HMV or someone will take it back without a reciept.


Regardless OP: the title of this thread is misleading. Microsot legally don't have to lift a finger.

What does OP and RMA mean, I have looked up http://www.internetslang.com/ and not there, OP seems everywhere in these trends. a bit 404 with these abbreviations

samhail

OP is original poster (used alot on these forums ), and RMA is "Return Materials Authorization" (try define: RMA in google)

welcome to boards

psicic

jonny24ie wrote: »

Well Game and Smyths have both said that secondhand consoles are covered under the 3 year RROD warrenty. He bought it on that advise and then Microsoft want 80+ Euro for a repair!



Shop don't want to know about it, told him to go to MS.



80+

Woah-woah-woah! Folks, stall the ball a bit. Maybe I'm missing something here, but some of the advice here seems a bit wide of the mark (hence I think I may be misreading a post or two). OP, can you clarify, did you or did you not buy this second-hand console from a retailer? That makes a big difference to how simple your position is.

Second-hand does not mean you have no consumer rights.

(p.s. I've just joined the XBox360 club, and I fully intend to exercise my 6 years statutory rights in relation to any RROD.... none of this messing with 3 year warranties)

papu

ring consumer rights , small claims court , Tbh if its rrod , a huge problem 30% of all 360's it should be fixed by microsoft , if not through you then through the shop.

papu

papu wrote: »

ring consumer rights , small claims court , Tbh if its rrod , a huge problem 30% of all 360's it should be fixed by microsoft , if not through you then through the shop.

+1
RROD is a big problem, MS know this, thats why they came out and said they would give a 3 year warranty. To be honest with you they should of recalled the consoles at an early stage, but they didn't, still won't and neither will they admit it's a major design flaw.
Regardless of the 3 year warranty, if your console RROD they should fix/replace it.

boardswalker

I don't think we have enough information to help the OP and some of the answers so far have not been particularly relevant.

The first question to be answered is who did the OP's brother buy the console from. This determines who the contract was with and what laws govern the contract. If the buyer bought from a retailer then then the purchase is governed by the Consumer Protection Act and whatever guarantees the retailer gave are the relevant guarantees - see www.consumerconnect.ie. The OP says that Game and Smyths indicated Microsoft would honour the warranty but its not at all clear that the unit was bought from Game or Smyths.

If the unit was bought from a private individual then I am not as sure about any rights. I suspect that, as with buying a car privately, the buyer has very little protection.

All in all, then, I believe that legally Microsoft have no liability. The OP's brother did not have a contract with Microsoft.

Doctor DooM

boardswalker wrote: »

I don't think we have enough information to help the OP and some of the answers so far have not been particularly relevant.

The first question to be answered is who did the OP's brother buy the console from. This determines who the contract was with and what laws govern the contract. If the buyer bought from a retailer then then the purchase is governed by the Consumer Protection Act and whatever guarantees the retailer gave are the relevant guarantees - see www.consumerconnect.ie. The OP says that Game and Smyths indicated Microsoft would honour the warranty but its not at all clear that the unit was bought from Game or Smyths.

If the unit was bought from a private individual then I am not as sure about any rights. I suspect that, as with buying a car privately, the buyer has very little protection.

All in all, then, I believe that legally Microsoft have no liability. The OP's brother did not have a contract with Microsoft.

Bang on in both cases. The retailer is the one responsible for the goods if they were bought in a store. If it was second hand from a private individual, AFAIR, caveat emptor comes into play.

cast_iron

boardswalker wrote: »

If the unit was bought from a private individual then I am not as sure about any rights. I suspect that, as with buying a car privately, the buyer has very little protection.

Hmmm, I don't know about that.

To apply your car analogy to this case, what you are saying is that if I buy a 6 month old car that comes with a 5 year warranty off a private individual, that the warranty becomes void (with 4.5 years warranty still to run)??

I think the car manufacturer would honour the warranty in such a case.

You are correct, however, about having little protection against the seller; there would be no warranty to be offered by him.

boardswalker

You're right - the car might not be the best example. My main point is still valid however.

The point about the car is that car manufacturers freely offer the transferrable warranty. There is no legal obligation on them to do so. Consumer legislation does not require them to provide a transferrable warranty. If you can find evidence that Microsoft offered a transferrable warranty you might have a case. I don't believe Microsoft offered a transferrable warranty.

The only hope the OP has is if the seller asserted that the warranty was transferrable and the OP can prove that. In an ideal world that condition would have been documented which is unlikely to have happened.

cast_iron

boardswalker wrote: »

There is no legal obligation on them to do so. Consumer legislation does not require them to provide a transferrable warranty.

Well that's the crux of the matter. I'm not sure how correct that statement is.

What exactly is the warranty? A guarantee on a given product, yes? I'm not sure of the legal footing of a company invalidating a warranty just because the product has a new owner.

Whilst consumer legislation may not require them to provide a transferable warranty, I'm not aware of where it allows a company to invalidate the warranty once the product is sold to a third party.

Edit: As I understand it, companies are legally required to provide a warranty with a product (typically 12 months). Anything above this requirement would be where the customer and company in question enter into and agreement defined by said company. In such a case, the company could impose conditions, however erroneous, to the warranty in question.

mickoneill30

Guys, have a look at consumerconnect.ie

It explains what a guarantee is and what a warranty is.

Guarantee seems to be statutory rights.
Warranty seems to be whatever a manufacturer wants. It's an extension to your statutory rights and it becomes legal when offered but if it says it's non transferable then it's not.

To me it looks like if you buy something from a shop you have statutory rights and whatever warranty is offered.

If you sell that item on then the guy who buys it from you has no statutory rights. I sold something before and had a guy chasing me 6 months later about a fault with it. When I contacted the consumer agency to check what rights he had they said he had no rights as it was a private sale and it was second hand. He might have some rights in the warranty but it depends on its wording.

A company isn't obliged to offer a warranty (but they all do). They don't offer you statutory rights. That's something they have no option over.

ch750536

*I'm actually quoting US and UK law here, not sure if it is the same in Irish law, would be nice if someone could check.

To give a bit of clarity to the situation:

Guarantee.
Many years ago there was no such thing as a guarantee. If something broke you got it replaced, as it should not really break.
Some things needed to be debated, if you had a table for 10 years then what would you expect. These things were solved through arbitration.
Then, a very clever company decided that they could actually limit what they give to the customer whilst at the same time appearing to give the customer something new, a guarantee.
So, it came about that a new table would come with a guarantee for 5 years, meaning if it broke in those 5 years there would be no argument (unless an elephant sat on it) and the consumer cried 'hurrah' at such a marvellous thing.

However, a guarantee has no legal standing. When you buy a thing it has to be of working order for 'reasonable life'. This is something that is still decided by arbitration. As an example, a TV I had stopped working after 6 years, I contacted the manufacturer and asked them to repair it, they declined as the guarantee had lapsed.

I sent them a letter stating why I believe the TV should last more than 6 years and that I will take the matter to court if needed to resolve the issue. They sent me a letter back apologising and stating they would pick up the TV and repair it at no cost, which they did.

After all, which TV manufacturer would look forward to going to court to argue that the TV's they make should not last as long as 6 years.

Moral of the story, ignore a guarantee, it's actually there to offer protection to the manufacturers and has no legal standing. If you believe you have an inferior product for any reason then the manufacturers should listen.

Sam Vimes

cast_iron wrote: »

Well that's the crux of the matter. I'm not sure how correct that statement is.

What exactly is the warranty? A guarantee on a given product, yes? I'm not sure of the legal footing of a company invalidating a warranty just because the product has a new owner.

If a product is sold to a third party privately, the manufacturer has no contract with that third party and so no obligation to do anything for them. The third party hasn't given them any money so why should they help?

But you're right in that the guarantee is not void. If the console was given back to the original owner he could send it off under the guarantee

Cabaal

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If a product is sold to a third party privately, the manufacturer has no contract with that third party and so no obligation to do anything for them. The third party hasn't given them any money so why should they help?

But you're right in that the guarantee is not void. If the console was given back to the original owner he could send it off under the guarantee

This is correct, the op needs to either buy a new xbox now or return it to whoever they bought it from, its not any stores or Microsofts job to deal with this at this point