Litigate or shame?

[benjenbav]

It is totally hypothetical from our prospective though as we don’t know in the slightest what failed. From what type of trader and if a warranty contract was in place.

Other than that it’s simple. B&G replaced my Vulcan that went up in smoke after 18 months because as they said all products at the time sold in the EU carrried a min 2 year warranty.
In this case if there is a warranty that covers the failed parts your on to a winner , if it doesn’t your not.
Steveeasy

Yes, but - as fisherman says - your right as a consumer to expect goods bought to be fit for purpose etc is separate from any warranty.

I agree with others that naming and shaming is not the way to go.

I’d suggest you continue to pursue the seller. Getting them to agree to the product being independently examined to identify the cause of failure and then being prepared to be persistent in getting the seller to address any issues that can be laid at their door (either under warranty or your statutory/contractual rights) might be a start.

 

[TiggerToo]

Can we guess who please?!

Navigation/electronics by a manufacturer with a name similar to a large DIY chain would be my suggestion.

no, you can't. Let's see how this goes. In the end, maybe, I will tell the story.... but i am still hoping that it will all turn out for the best. There is ample opportunity for that to happen.

 

[benjenbav]

Yes, but - as fisherman says - your right as a consumer to expect goods bought to be fit for purpose etc is separate from any warranty.

I agree with others that naming and shaming is not the way to go.

I’d suggest you continue to pursue the seller. Getting them to agree to the product being independently examined to identify the cause of failure and then being prepared to be persistent in getting the seller to address any issues that can be laid at their door (either under warranty or your statutory/contractual rights) might be a start.

Sorry: meant this for TiggerToo. Not sure why I replied to steveeasy. Maybe as per the NHS 111 telehandler script “Are you feeling confused, or more confused than usual” applies to me.

 

[steveeasy]

Yes, but - as fisherman says - your right as a consumer to expect goods bought to be fit for purpose etc is separate from any warranty.

I agree with others that naming and shaming is not the way to go.

I’d suggest you continue to pursue the seller. Getting them to agree to the product being independently examined to identify the cause of failure and then being prepared to be persistent in getting the seller to address any issues that can be laid at their door (either under warranty or your statutory/contractual rights) might be a start.

Being the product seemingly has only just failed after 16 months and one assumes this has not been a concern up till it failed it seams it was fit for purpose. Can’t imagine how it could be argued it was not.
So then I would think it relies on a warranty matter. Was there one? Did the buyer get details of it. If there was no warranty then there is no chance of success and one is going to rely on good will.
That said for £10.000 there should have been a warranty but it’s not a legal obligation to provide one unless it was agreed at time of purchase. If that’s the case then where is it so the buyer can determine if the failed product is covered.
It really is simple. If one knows the facts which we don’t.

Steveeasy

 

[Sybarite]

Although we dont know what piece of kit you bought for moderately expensive £10,000 16 months ago, Id think it a bit strange they offered some of the parts that failed. Id read from that they are not accepting the kit failed due to a failure of a key component. Normally a failure is caused by a single component which may lead to damaging other components. If an engine failed due to a none wearing component, you would look for the engine to be repaired fully by the supplier.

Are you happy with the moderately expensive bit of kit? if yes, then youd be happy with the failed parts being supplied to rectify the kit. If you think it has failed due to not being of satisfactory standard. then you need to get expert opinion. with that go back to them. No point actively trying to publish the failure as this will not lead to the desired outcome and potentially you could find yourself being sued.

The warranty should make clear what it covers. if it does not then ask for clarity. If they do not provide you with clarity and try to hide behind a mist then this is a breach of the 2015 consumer rights act and would stand you in a stronger position.

£10,000 is not really a moderate amount of money. I think a piece of kit to that value should not fail in that timescale. If it was a mast or rigging how it failed, what part that lead to the failure, and the conditions at time all are very relevant.

With no detail at all its hard for anyone to really say what the best strategy would be.

Steveeasy

The essential question is - after the replacement of the bits does the piece of equipment work as intended? If not the warranty has not been respected.

In France whatever the suppliers offer as warranty the law states that it must be for at least two years.

 

[benjenbav]

Being the product seemingly has only just failed after 16 months and one assumes this has not been a concern up till it failed it seams it was fit for purpose. Can’t imagine how it could be argued it was not.
So then I would think it relies on a warranty matter. Was there one? Did the buyer get details of it. If there was no warranty then there is no chance of success and one is going to rely on good will.
That said for £10.000 there should have been a warranty but it’s not a legal obligation to provide one unless it was agreed at time of purchase. If that’s the case then where is it so the buyer can determine if the failed product is covered.
It really is simple. If one knows the facts which we don’t.

Steveeasy

Could be a component that is designed to last 10 years/10,000 hours that’s failed after 18 months/1,500 hours and directly caused consequential damage to other, maybe more expensive parts.

 

[steveeasy]

The essential question is - after the replacement of the bits does the piece of equipment work as intended? If not the warranty has not been respected.

In France whatever the suppliers offer as warranty the law states that it must be for at least two years.

But we dont know the details of the warranty do we. . it might not even exist. the word warranty may have just been used and accordingly the buyer needs to obtain the details of the warranty.

Steveeasy

 

[steveeasy]

Could be a component that is designed to last 10 years/10,000 hours that’s failed after 18 months/1,500 hours and directly caused consequential damage to other, maybe more expensive parts.

And that might be the case, but if there is no warranty then you rely on goodwill. A car is designed to last a fair period of time and one could assume the engine would do 100,000 miles. if it fails outside the warranty period. no claim.

Steveeasy

 

[dunedin]

And that might be the case, but if there is no warranty then you rely on goodwill. A car is designed to last a fair period of time and one could assume the engine would do 100,000 miles. if it fails outside the warranty period. no claim.

Steveeasy

OP said in post #1 that there is a 2 year warranty.
But has failed to explain the nature of the warranty, or the meaning of his statement that the supplier “offers to supply part of the failed pieces”.

 

[xyachtdave]

no, you can't. Let's see how this goes. In the end, maybe, I will tell the story.... but i am still hoping that it will all turn out for the best. There is ample opportunity for that to happen

That's the trouble with the internet, speculation is the lifeblood of the forums!

 

[benjenbav]

And that might be the case, but if there is no warranty then you rely on goodwill. A car is designed to last a fair period of time and one could assume the engine would do 100,000 miles. if it fails outside the warranty period. no claim.

Steveeasy

In b2c contracts, where an item fails sooner than it should the Consumer Rights Act 2015 helps the consumer. See, for example, s9(1)-(3)

“9Goods to be of satisfactory quality​

(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.“

 

[srm]

10K sounds like a substantial piece of kit, (mechanical or electronic), for the boat. I would certainly expect something in that price range to continue to function without problems, if looked after, well beyond two years.
I would suggest that it has clearly failed the satisfactory quality clause of the Consumer Rights Act 2015:

(2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—

I did have a problem with a much less expensive electronics item. When I was not happy with the supplier's repair I contacted the local Trading Standards office for advice on what redress I could ask for. Then went back to the supplier and told him what Trading Standards had said. We then came to a satisfactory (for me) solution. However, we were both in a fairly small community which probably helped.

 

[B27]

There are lots of legitimate exclusions from warranties.
Parts that are expected to wear, like the clutch or brakes on a car.
Abnormal use. You buy a DIY tool and use it for trade purposes or for a job it's not intended for...
Accidental damage or outside influence.

Consumer law varies from place to place,
Generic advice is unlikely to be accurate or helpful.

 

[benjenbav]

..,
Consumer law varies from place to place,
..,

Very true. To clarify, my comments re CRA 2015 relate to England and Wales only.

 

[westernman]

OP said in post #1 that there is a 2 year warranty.
But has failed to explain the nature of the warranty, or the meaning of his statement that the supplier “offers to supply part of the failed pieces”.

On my 5 year old CX Turbo Diesel II, the engine started leaking cooling water into the oil. Not good. I bought the car second hand when it was 9 months old. It was a known problem with a series of that particular engine at the time. The warranty was one year from new. It had about 190,000 kms on the clock at the time.

Citroen offered a new engine. I had to pay for the installation. Actually the garage/dealer arranged it all. I did not have to argue or plead with anyone.

Actually the first engine delivered had a damaged delivery box. So the garage/dealer refused it. The second engine too.
They installed the third one.

Shame Citroen no longer makes real Citroens any more.

 

[Frank Holden]

I was worried that this involved a red engine - maybe not - unless it was a saildrive.
In Australia the manufacturer can say what they like - consumer affairs sez 'that cost $X so it should last Y years'.
I took back a set of $30 bathroom scales recently that were 3 year old.
Bloke in the shop said this had never happened before - the bringing them back bit.
I guess most couldn't be bothered or had lost the proof of purchase etc. Got a new set which still say I am lots heavier than I really am.

 

[Frank Holden]

On my 5 year old CX Turbo Diesel II, the engine started leaking cooling water into the oil. Not good. I bought the car second hand when it was 9 months old. It was a known problem with a series of that particular engine at the time. The warranty was one year from new. It had about 190,000 kms on the clock at the time.

Citroen offered a new engine. I had to pay for the installation. Actually the garage/dealer arranged it all. I did not have to argue or plead with anyone.

Actually the first engine delivered had a damaged delivery box. So the garage/dealer refused it. The second engine too.
They installed the third one.

Shame Citroen no longer makes real Citroens any more.

Cor... I believe the turbo diesel was the fastest production diesel car on the planet when introduced. I had 2 CXs.. a 2.4 and a 2.5.. likened by friends to being driven around in an armchair. Current limo is a 7yo C5 turbo diesel 'tourer' - aka 'station wagon' in Straya - which I hope sees me out. One of the very last imported into the country.

 

[lustyd]

only the statutary one year

What year/country was that? We’ve had the EU statutory 2 year warranty for decades, even though most Brits were unaware

 

[fisherman]

What year/country was that? We’ve had the EU statutory 2 year warranty for decades, even though most Brits were unaware

About ten years ago. Certainly John Lewis told me the one year was out, but the y didn't know about the six year thing

 

[lustyd]

About ten years ago. Certainly John Lewis told me the one year was out, but the y didn't know about the six year thing

They’ve been terrible with it, pretending that you get extra warranty for registering with them. I love them as a shop but misrepresenting the law to customers is unacceptable