Sale of goods act - who is liable

page1

Say a product is purchased from a retailer. It subsequently breaks but is outside the warranty. The retailer originally didn't have the product in stock so retailer B supplied it to them. Retailer A is gone bust, can the customer sue retailer B under the SGSS act as the supplier of the product or is his contract solely with retailer A.

source

The contract is with the retailer you bought the product from.

booboo88

outside of warranty, no come back.

i was very lucky with my old laptop. found reciept of second last day of warranty fixed and now sold

Victor

Is this an exam question?

The purchaser can certainly go after the vendor and manufacturer, anyone in between is going to be a little be harder, but I don't see why not. The problem is going to be proving the case, especially, the sales chain.

booboo88 wrote: »

outside of warranty, no come back.

Not necessarily. While most warranties tend to be for one year, most electrical equipment is expected to last longer than that and I think there are newish EU rules on the point.

If the case of you laptop fell apart from rust after 366 days, would you hope it was a leap year?

coylemj

Victor wrote: »

Is this an exam question?

Deffo, same question was asked here a few weeks ago. No mention of product type, amount of money involved or hardship arising from product failure, all theory.

Resend

booboo88 wrote: »

outside of warranty, no come back.

i was very lucky with my old laptop. found reciept of second last day of warranty fixed and now sold

not true product has to last a reasonable time regardless of any warranty

source

Resend wrote: »

not true product has to last a reasonable time regardless of any warranty

True but seeing as this appears to be a hypothetical situation, which only says the product is out of warranty, we don't know if it's 1 day or 10 years out of warranty.

OP if you could give a bit more detail you'll get better answers.

page1

Thanks for the replies. The product is a car, cost €45K, it's 3 years outside a two year warranty.
I understand that the warranty is in addition to your statutory rights. However that isn't really my query, it's that the retailer is gone out of business so no action can be taken against him.
This retailer was sold the car by another retailer as retailer A didn't have the car in stock ( common practice with garages).
Can retailer B be sued? I would think not as there is no contract between B and the end customer but I wanted to be sure.

Jo King

Victor wrote: »

Is this an exam question?

The purchaser can certainly go after the vendor and manufacturer, anyone in between is going to be a little be harder, but I don't see why not.

I can certainly see why not. Sales between persons in trade do not attract liability under consumer protection legislation. The responsibility is on the ultimate vendor to supply goods in a merchantable condition to the consumer. The manufacturer may provide a warranty and may come under the products liability directive.

Only the individual who sold the goods to the end consumer and the manufacturer can be successfully pursued at all. Even that is subject to qualification.

page1

I would have assumed that the customer could only sue the vendor with whom he contracted. The garage that sold the car to the the other garage have no contract with the customer.
Seeing the garage he contracted with has gone out of business I would have thought his only available action would be to sue the manufacturer/importer.

slimjimmc

page1 wrote: »

I would have assumed that the customer could only sue the vendor with whom he contracted. The garage that sold the car to the the other garage have no contract with the customer.
Seeing the garage he contracted with has gone out of business I would have thought his only available action would be to sue the manufacturer/importer.

But he has no contract with either so on what grounds could this even be entertained, dangerously defective design/manufacture?

booboo88

ah but outside of warranty, parts and labour, if neccesary are nae covered

jblack

Perhaps a claim outside contract in tort against the third party seller, especially where the third party seller had actual knowledge of a buyer from the original seller.

Privity of contract may afford protection to seller B but may be a case in tort.

Guy:Incognito

jblack wrote: »

, especially where the third party seller had actual knowledge of a buyer from the original seller.
.

Do they though? They may well know nothign beyond they sold an item to someone. The fact that that someone then resold it doesnt matter to them.

jblack

Just speculating but if OP had some proof that garage B sold to Garage A because garage A had a specific customer then there is at least an argument to be raised that if B knew or ought reasonably to have known that the product was defective.

Perhaps OP may advise of any business link between A and B? Are they parent and subsid - owned by same directors etc...