CGA advice

Forums › Off topic › CGA advice

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

1030 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Subscriber

#1751474 1-Apr-2017 09:00

D.W:

trig42:

Hi,

I have a Parmco oven - AR900-LEG.

It developed the exact same fault, at about 6 years.

The issue with ours is the mechanism behind the function selection knob - it had overheated and needed replacing. The elements etc were all fine. Yours sounds the same (ours would only get to 100 degrees or so on one of the functions). Weird that Parmco say they haven't got the parts. They certainly had them for ours (and this was repaired in November last year).

Interesting you say that, I found this on another forum also:

On the subject of Parmco ovens -

Our property has one (purchased by landlord). For a while it had been failing to properly heat up when using any of the bake settings. Grill would work fine. Then the timer knob failed, the spring had come loose. Parmco sent out a 'technician'. He replaced the knob but we still had problems with it heating up. Landlord called out a different tech and found that the entire portion behind the timer knob (wires and all) had melted and was shocked the entire unit hadn't caught fire.

Several people with the same fault, mostly caused by overheating behind the control knobs. Sounds like a design fault and a potential safety issue. Maybe I'm being a bit OTT, but is it worth a mention to the Energy Safety http://www.energysafety.govt.nz/about/external-organisations-links/product-recalls-and-general-product-safety

If you can't laugh at yourself then you probably shouldn't laugh at others.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1752823 1-Apr-2017 18:35

kiwiharry:

Several people with the same fault, mostly caused by overheating behind the control knobs. Sounds like a design fault and a potential safety issue. Maybe I'm being a bit OTT, but is it worth a mention to the Energy Safety http://www.energysafety.govt.nz/about/external-organisations-links/product-recalls-and-general-product-safety

Absolutely not over the top. It's exactly why regulators exist. Let them decide whether there is a wide-ranging safety issue and they have the power to order product recalls when there is a justifiable case for it.

D.W

726 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756105 4-Apr-2017 08:59

After informing them I wasn't interested in their $850 replacement offer, and then a follow-up email requesting the best contact person to use on the Disputes Tribunal form, they followed up with this:

"We’d like to extend the offer of a replacement FS9S-5-2 delivered directly to you for $850.00. On the basis of our own experiences with the disputes tribunal process a claim of this nature would at very best only likely receive costs awarded to a value circa $1000.00 this is based on the ovens current age, 15ys as a life expectancy is unrealistic and would be ruled as such in any tribunal hearing to a more realistic lifespan of 10years, a ruling for a full refund of the purchase price with consideration to all the circumstances would be unfounded.

Given the best possible outcome via disputes process receiving costs awarded circa $1000 you would still need to find an additional $1500.00 odd dollars to buy a replacement unit so it is on this basis that the offer of our replacement at $850.00 is considered fair and reasonable and by far the most practical way to resolve this matter. I would urge you give the offer some further thought as it is made with sincerity and genuinely we believe it the most sensible way to proceed."

timmmay

20581 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756108 4-Apr-2017 09:11

Tough call. It's only worth going to disputes if you think you'll get an award for full replacement, given repair isn't possible. If they decide to pro-rata it then they're right, you'll need to find a bunch more money for a replacement.

They've offered you a product that retails for $2200 (RRP $3000) for $850 delivered. That to me does sound like a genuine off made in good faith.

Personally, I would probably pay the $850 for a brand new oven, so long as it had a standard warranty and CGA still applied. I just wouldn't want the hassle, and I like new stuff.

Consumer says

Economic life: At some point an appliance reaches the end of its economic life: that’s when it's more economical to replace the appliance than repair it. Our estimates of “economic life” are based on a survey we sent to manufacturers in February 2013. Where we didn't receive a response, we used data from a previous year’s survey.

Life expectancy: This is how long an appliance should last, given reasonable use and perhaps some repair. Our estimates of “life expectancy” are based on our appliance-reliability surveys and feedback from our members.

Ovens & stoves
Economic life: 10-20+ years
Life expectancy: 15+ years

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1756113 4-Apr-2017 09:23

They've called your bluff. Do you call theirs back?

I probably would, because I'd be p*ssed off by now. I reckon they should repair it, and if they can't you need a refund/replacement. Not your fault they don't have parts.

Pretty certain that the CGA says Repair, Replace or Refund (at the retailer/manufacturers discretion). Buying a (discounted) new one is not one of those three remedies (IANAL though).

I had thought Parmco were a pretty decent company in my dealings with them. They are proving here to be a bit less so. When my oven needs replacement, I will remember this.

Have they got a Facebook or Twitter presence?

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756164 4-Apr-2017 10:25

D.W:

After informing them I wasn't interested in their $850 replacement offer, and then a follow-up email requesting the best contact person to use on the Disputes Tribunal form, they followed up with this:

"We’d like to extend the offer of a replacement FS9S-5-2 delivered directly to you for $850.00. On the basis of our own experiences with the disputes tribunal process a claim of this nature would at very best only likely receive costs awarded to a value circa $1000.00 this is based on the ovens current age, 15ys as a life expectancy is unrealistic and would be ruled as such in any tribunal hearing to a more realistic lifespan of 10years, a ruling for a full refund of the purchase price with consideration to all the circumstances would be unfounded.

Given the best possible outcome via disputes process receiving costs awarded circa $1000 you would still need to find an additional $1500.00 odd dollars to buy a replacement unit so it is on this basis that the offer of our replacement at $850.00 is considered fair and reasonable and by far the most practical way to resolve this matter. I would urge you give the offer some further thought as it is made with sincerity and genuinely we believe it the most sensible way to proceed."

Take them to the DT, email them again saying age has nothing to do with damages you will be going for as they are currently breaking the CGA on not having spare parts and that it should last longer than it has. The CGA is very clear about that.

Also point out that they will also have to take time off work to attend the DT and also point out that lawyers can't go and who you should expect to turn up at it.

When filing you papers put in the cost of a new oven (does not matter the make, find something that works the same) + labour to put in new oven + time wasted dealing with these guys (add another 1k on top of the oven cost + labour). Don't include the filing fee however.

Sounds like they have had others talk about taking them to the DT and they are bullying people into not going by taking out there butt on the amount that can be paid out.

timmmay

20581 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756173 4-Apr-2017 10:35

tripp:

Take them to the DT, email them again saying age has nothing to do with damages you will be going for as they are currently breaking the CGA on not having spare parts and that it should last longer than it has. The CGA is very clear about that.

Also point out that they will also have to take time off work to attend the DT and also point out that lawyers can't go and who you should expect to turn up at it.

When filing you papers put in the cost of a new oven (does not matter the make, find something that works the same) + labour to put in new oven + time wasted dealing with these guys (add another 1k on top of the oven cost + labour). Don't include the filing fee however.

I'd be careful with the contact with them, as they seem to be trying to be reasonable. Anything said can be taken into DT by them.

Also, inflating the claim with your time probably won't go down well. Be careful what you claim for, make sure you follow DT guidelines.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1756181 4-Apr-2017 10:52

As I understand the CGA. Replace or refund means replace with a new item or refund the purchase price, ot depreciated value.

IMO 10 years should be the minimum life expectancy for an oven.

Mike

maxeon

1279 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1756215 4-Apr-2017 11:54

I would proceed filing the claim with DT. I am fairly sure it will work your way with the information that you already have. Just proceed with applying if they do not give you a replacement. The CGA clearly says repair at their costs or full refund / replacement. No partial or depreciation loss etc.

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756232 4-Apr-2017 12:02

timmmay:

tripp:

Take them to the DT, email them again saying age has nothing to do with damages you will be going for as they are currently breaking the CGA on not having spare parts and that it should last longer than it has. The CGA is very clear about that.

Also point out that they will also have to take time off work to attend the DT and also point out that lawyers can't go and who you should expect to turn up at it.

When filing you papers put in the cost of a new oven (does not matter the make, find something that works the same) + labour to put in new oven + time wasted dealing with these guys (add another 1k on top of the oven cost + labour). Don't include the filing fee however.

I'd be careful with the contact with them, as they seem to be trying to be reasonable. Anything said can be taken into DT by them.

Also, inflating the claim with your time probably won't go down well. Be careful what you claim for, make sure you follow DT guidelines.

Have "inflated" before and got the amount I had down on my claim

timmmay

20581 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756274 4-Apr-2017 13:01

tripp:

Have "inflated" before and got the amount I had down on my claim

Interesting :)

D.W

726 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756277 4-Apr-2017 13:05

I have responded and noted that they are in breach of the CGA due to lack of spare parts available.

I noted that I have found 3 instances of people with the same fault, one of which a technician stated that they considered it to be a fire hazard, and that I found this concerning.

I then stated that if they don't accept my offer to cover shipping for a replacement, I will proceed to lodge with DT and claim for all costs associated with rectifying the issue.

allio

885 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756278 4-Apr-2017 13:06

D.W:

"We’d like to extend the offer of a replacement FS9S-5-2 delivered directly to you for $850.00. On the basis of our own experiences with the disputes tribunal process a claim of this nature would at very best only likely receive costs awarded to a value circa $1000.00 this is based on the ovens current age, 15ys as a life expectancy is unrealistic and would be ruled as such in any tribunal hearing to a more realistic lifespan of 10years, a ruling for a full refund of the purchase price with consideration to all the circumstances would be unfounded.

I'm not really sure what they're on about here, given a) the oven is 6.5 years old, not 10 (or 15), and b) the CGA doesn't allow the retailer to depreciate the value of the good based on how old it is.

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1756309 4-Apr-2017 13:37

D.W:

I have responded and noted that they are in breach of the CGA due to lack of spare parts available.

I noted that I have found 3 instances of people with the same fault, one of which a technician stated that they considered it to be a fire hazard, and that I found this concerning.

I then stated that if they don't accept my offer to cover shipping for a replacement, I will proceed to lodge with DT and claim for all costs associated with rectifying the issue.

Cool. Let us know how they respond.

I have a feeling my oven will do the same thing again, and if it does it within the next 4 years, I'll be off to the DT too.

D.W

726 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756388 4-Apr-2017 15:28

Last reply from them. I won't be responding further and will proceed with DT:

"We will always meet our obligations under the CGA but regrettably the element can no longer be soured via this supplier hence we are faced we looking at offering an alternative solution, if we were able to supply said element the cost for repairs would be thereabouts $400.00 for parts and labour, this is my best estimate based on all factors associated with a repair scenario.

Given the above repair costs assuming you could effect such repairs but we both know this is not an option surely our offer which will effectively leave you with a new oven and warranty would be as noted previously the best way forward in resolving this matter. This offer still stands and if you wish to digest it further by all means do so, equally if you feel you must pursue the disputes process then that of course is your prerogative."

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6