CGA advice

Forums › Off topic › CGA advice

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#1756393 4-Apr-2017 15:41

lol at "we will always meet our obligations under the CGA", if that were the case, they would have spare parts. They are making their inability to source parts (through loss of parts supplier or whatever the case may be) your problem, clearly under the CGA, its not your problem, its theirs.

We cant fix it, but we'll charge you our cost to replace it?

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756394 4-Apr-2017 15:44

Surely if they could get the parts, they would also have to cover the cost of repair under the CGA?

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756404 4-Apr-2017 15:56

Apparently according to this article which is about the CGA and cars, "There’s no provision [in the CGA] for account to be taken
of the use of goods before a consumer rejects them" http://autofile.co.nz/issues/Past/2013/2013-01-15%20Autofile.pdf .

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756413 4-Apr-2017 16:10

allio:

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.

I also wonder how they can say 15 years of life for an oven is unrealistic! My last oven was at least 30 years old, and was only removed due it it looking dated and shabby. My current one is about 12 years old and no problems, and still looks as good as new. Especially as ovens aren't usually used all that much, compared to hobs.

timmmay

20591 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756447 4-Apr-2017 16:57

They sound fairly reasonable, even though they're clearly not meeting the CGA. Just file and go along, see how it turns out. You'll either end up with a new oven for free or you won't.

loceff13

1065 posts

Uber Geek

#1756450 4-Apr-2017 17:14

networkn:Yeah the CGA doesn't really take this into account specifically, mostly because of the complications, though it should. We see the same thing with computers. Someone who buys a $299 computer shouldn't be entitled to a 5 year warranty whereas in my eyes someone who spends $1500+ might.

What about for a part like a HDD? imo theres a very valid argument for that lasting 3 years regardless of the laptop it came in. Theres simply no data showing cheaper value drives last less time(for consumer products). I'm of the opinion even the cheap <$400 laptops should last 2 years easy given they are new when you buy them(not re-manufactured etc).

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756452 4-Apr-2017 17:22

loceff13:

networkn:Yeah the CGA doesn't really take this into account specifically, mostly because of the complications, though it should. We see the same thing with computers. Someone who buys a $299 computer shouldn't be entitled to a 5 year warranty whereas in my eyes someone who spends $1500+ might.

What about for a part like a HDD? imo theres a very valid argument for that lasting 3 years regardless of the laptop it came in. Theres simply no data showing cheaper value drives last less time(for consumer products). I'm of the opinion even the cheap <$400 laptops should last 2 years easy given they are new when you buy them(not re-manufactured etc).

Computers are very different, because you can just switch out parts, and all th aprts are made by different manufacturers. A computer is a bit like buy a new house, where you have lots of appliances, where one may fail, you can just get it switch it out. You don't have to replace a house if an appliance fails.

What does consumers life expectancy table say, as they will have a range depending on the cheapest to the most expensive. Then there is the fact that you may buy something for 50% off, and the RRP may have been $2000, but you only paid $1000, and $1000 is what cheap poorly made products are piced at.. Should that product you purchased on discount last less time than the full priced product, because it was on special?

If I was the OP, what I may do is ask NZ Consumer to get their opinion. I believe you can only do this if you are a subscriber, but that maybe worth it. Then send that to the company, as that is an impartial opinion by a NZ consumer expert. Going to the DT is costly in time, and it appears it can be a bit of a gamble depending on who you get. But taking NZ consumers opinion into the DT should add some weight to your case, as they are the experts, and it is independent, and has no bias. The other option is to go to the CAB for some advice.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

joff_nz

446 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756454 4-Apr-2017 17:29

I think here the best course of action is just to file. To be fair to Parmco, the CGA is unclear and unprescriptive in many ways. From the side of the story here, I don't think they're trying to mislead anybody, or avoid their responsibilities. They sound reasonable, and seem to think they are meeting their requirements under CGA (for the record, I think they're incorrect). I think they're only misguided, not malicious.

Fortunately we have a system set up to allow this difference in opinion to be tested by a moderator. Use the system & please - let us know how you get on.

If you go ahead with filing, I'd love to here what happens at each step of the process.

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756491 4-Apr-2017 18:40

joff_nz:

I think here the best course of action is just to file. To be fair to Parmco, the CGA is unclear and unprescriptive in many ways. From the side of the story here, I don't think they're trying to mislead anybody, or avoid their responsibilities. They sound reasonable, and seem to think they are meeting their requirements under CGA (for the record, I think they're incorrect). I think they're only misguided, not malicious.

Fortunately we have a system set up to allow this difference in opinion to be tested by a moderator. Use the system & please - let us know how you get on.

If you go ahead with filing, I'd love to here what happens at each step of the process.

Just an FYI for everyone, we might never know how this turns out, most cases like this then to have a confidentiality clause for settlement. OP is free to talk about it till the day an agreement has been made. OP if you do get an acceptable agreement/settlement don't feel like you have to tell us what happen.

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756494 4-Apr-2017 18:59

tripp:

Just an FYI for everyone, we might never know how this turns out, most cases like this then to have a confidentiality clause for settlement. OP is free to talk about it till the day an agreement has been made. OP if you do get an acceptable agreement/settlement don't feel like you have to tell us what happen.

Doesn't that only apply if they reach a settlement prior to going to the DT? Aren't some of the DT cases published on their website with the names redacted ? Surely a similar case has already been to the DT, and published somewhere?

joff_nz

446 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1756513 4-Apr-2017 19:13

tripp:
joff_nz:

I think here the best course of action is just to file. To be fair to Parmco, the CGA is unclear and unprescriptive in many ways. From the side of the story here, I don't think they're trying to mislead anybody, or avoid their responsibilities. They sound reasonable, and seem to think they are meeting their requirements under CGA (for the record, I think they're incorrect). I think they're only misguided, not malicious.

Fortunately we have a system set up to allow this difference in opinion to be tested by a moderator. Use the system & please - let us know how you get on.

If you go ahead with filing, I'd love to here what happens at each step of the process.

Just an FYI for everyone, we might never know how this turns out, most cases like this then to have a confidentiality clause for settlement. OP is free to talk about it till the day an agreement has been made. OP if you do get an acceptable agreement/settlement don't feel like you have to tell us what happen.

Oh bums. Would have been interested to hear. Ah well

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756518 4-Apr-2017 19:16

DT doesn't require confidentiality. A settlement prior MIGHT.

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1756537 4-Apr-2017 19:23

joff_nz:

Oh bums. Would have been interested to hear. Ah well

Although if we don't hear, then we can possibly assume that it didn't end up going to the DT, and they got a positive outcome as a settlement.

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756539 4-Apr-2017 19:25

I doubt it would prevent him letting us know he came to an arrangement but couldn't disclose the details.

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1756545 4-Apr-2017 19:30

networkn:
I doubt it would prevent him letting us know he came to an arrangement but couldn't disclose the details.

People can say an agreement has been reached but normally that's about it. Parties that lose don't like it getting out as that can open the flood doors. If I remember correctly a claim at the DT can be heard up to 6 years after the event so that could be anyone from 2011/2012 that had issues that they had to pay "labour costs" to get their oven fixed.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6