@tdgeek thanks for your reply. I shall have to appeal to their sense of fair play I guess.

Im the OP, Briscoes replaced the item, as eventually promised over the phone. But, again, its only because Russell Hobbs allow claims a little over the warranty. So, they prefer to downplay CGA or as Ive been told by two people, the CGA only covers the warranty period

All of this is over the phone, not in writing, but I will complain to ComCom anyway

tdgeek:

 

kiwifidget:

 

But on a more serious note....

 

We had a solar water heating system installed 7-8 years ago, and the warranty has run out.

 

But before that happened, one of the controllers went haywire and had to be replaced.

 

Now the replacement controller is playing up.

 

Would the CGA cover the replacement part that is less than 2 years old?

 

 

If you have a product that is say 20 months old and 24 month warranty, and it gets replaced, you do not have another 24 month warranty. Same applies if it was a CGA claim of say 36 months old and 24 month warranty that CGA allowed. 

 

Hope that helps

 

kiwifidget:

 

@tdgeek thanks for your reply. I shall have to appeal to their sense of fair play I guess.

 

A solar water heating system sounds like a significant investment though.  If the expected lifespan is more than 8 years ( I would think it should be) than I think CGA could indeed factor into it.  But as you say, approach them with your issue and listen to what they have to say first.  A company that values its reputation and stands behind its products should come to the party.

floydbloke:

 

 

 

 

 

A solar water heating system sounds like a significant investment though.  If the expected lifespan is more than 8 years ( I would think it should be) than I think CGA could indeed factor into it.  But as you say, approach them with your issue and listen to what they have to say first.  A company that values its reputation and stands behind its products should come to the party.

 

I agree.

I should have added more as his post was about a previous fail and replaced part. That wont add to the future warranty or CGA but as you say, the overall product with a lengthy lifespan would need a lengthy CGA coverage

kiwifidget:

 

But on a more serious note....

 

We had a solar water heating system installed 7-8 years ago, and the warranty has run out.

 

But before that happened, one of the controllers went haywire and had to be replaced.

 

Now the replacement controller is playing up.

 

Would the CGA cover the replacement part that is less than 2 years old?

 

As stated CGA doesn't 'reset' with the replacement part. The question is how long should such a system reasonably be expected to last. 5 years? 10 years? I'm not sure.

andrewNZ: You need to also complain to the Briscoes head office. You can use the website contact form, or even Facebook if that's your thing.

The store will definitely receive a "please explain".

Like all these situations, the company can't fix it if they don't know about it.

Agree. Given that I can't see any CGA fines, and if they said, well, your right, we do have to accept this as a CGA replacement then I would have just laid a low key complaint to them. But, still, Russell Ho bbs did me a favour, thats why they replaced it. I will go with ways. ComCom wise as there is no written documentation so they wont do anything, I kn ow that, but its a heads up. A subsequent complaint from elsewhere will carry more weight.

This is why I don't really like the CGA.

It allows for time and effort to be wasted arguing the toss, and if you get legal, the companies often have in house legal departments they can deploy at no additional cost to themselves, unlike the consumer.

I really think that we would be better served by an amendment that placed products into categories. For example, a fridge is a Category 10 item, expected to function correctly for at least 10 years. CGA is 'no quibble' within that 10 year period. A toaster might be Category 3 - expected to last 3 years and so on.

IMO, without a more black and white approach the CGA will never offer the protection it was intended to simply because too much interpretation is involved and human nature will be to avoid the cost if at all possible.

Problem is, if one fridge is worth $800 and one is worth $3000 (for example) people will jump up and down because their $800 fridge didn't last as long as a $3000 one. Maybe some subcategories under that would be helpful?

Geektastic:

 

This is why I don't really like the CGA.

 

It allows for time and effort to be wasted arguing the toss, and if you get legal, the companies often have in house legal departments they can deploy at no additional cost to themselves, unlike the consumer.

 

I really think that we would be better served by an amendment that placed products into categories. For example, a fridge is a Category 10 item, expected to function correctly for at least 10 years. CGA is 'no quibble' within that 10 year period. A toaster might be Category 3 - expected to last 3 years and so on.

 

 

 

IMO, without a more black and white approach the CGA will never offer the protection it was intended to simply because too much interpretation is involved and human nature will be to avoid the cost if at all possible.

 

If it goes to Disputes Tribunal, there are no lawyers involved for each side. Its a low cot service, so its accessible.

quickymart:

 

Problem is, if one fridge is worth $800 and one is worth $3000 (for example) people will jump up and down because their $800 fridge didn't last as long as a $3000 one. Maybe some subcategories under that would be helpful?

 

I feel the Disputes Tribunal manages that well enough

tdgeek:

Geektastic:

This is why I don't really like the CGA.

It allows for time and effort to be wasted arguing the toss, and if you get legal, the companies often have in house legal departments they can deploy at no additional cost to themselves, unlike the consumer.

I really think that we would be better served by an amendment that placed products into categories. For example, a fridge is a Category 10 item, expected to function correctly for at least 10 years. CGA is 'no quibble' within that 10 year period. A toaster might be Category 3 - expected to last 3 years and so on.

 

IMO, without a more black and white approach the CGA will never offer the protection it was intended to simply because too much interpretation is involved and human nature will be to avoid the cost if at all possible.

If it goes to Disputes Tribunal, there are no lawyers involved for each side. Its a low cot service, so its accessible.

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

This is why I don't really like the CGA.

 

 

 

It allows for time and effort to be wasted arguing the toss, and if you get legal, the companies often have in house legal departments they can deploy at no additional cost to themselves, unlike the consumer.

 

 

 

I really think that we would be better served by an amendment that placed products into categories. For example, a fridge is a Category 10 item, expected to function correctly for at least 10 years. CGA is 'no quibble' within that 10 year period. A toaster might be Category 3 - expected to last 3 years and so on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IMO, without a more black and white approach the CGA will never offer the protection it was intended to simply because too much interpretation is involved and human nature will be to avoid the cost if at all possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it goes to Disputes Tribunal, there are no lawyers involved for each side. Its a low cot service, so its accessible.

 

Accessible, yes, but still an imposition on your time, energy and resources.

I personally prefer companies that offer no quibble lifetime warranty, but to be fair most of those come from US companies who recognise the benefit of that to their sales and reputation.

no quibble lifetime warranty

Thats an option. What would the cost be? Say a $10 toaster. Its going to fail. Say every 3 years. so $10 toaster x 20 years? The manufacturer will get $10 from you and pay $200. So pay a lifetime fee if $125? $400 toaster, you need to hope it will last 20 years. 

OR, lets do what software does, rent everything. At the end of gar day the manufacturer has to make a profit. Would you sell products that have lifetime warranties? No way. It works as a consumer though, but thats selfish.

tdgeek:

 

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

 

Geektastic:

 

 

 

This is why I don't really like the CGA.

 

 

 

It allows for time and effort to be wasted arguing the toss, and if you get legal, the companies often have in house legal departments they can deploy at no additional cost to themselves, unlike the consumer.

 

 

 

I really think that we would be better served by an amendment that placed products into categories. For example, a fridge is a Category 10 item, expected to function correctly for at least 10 years. CGA is 'no quibble' within that 10 year period. A toaster might be Category 3 - expected to last 3 years and so on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IMO, without a more black and white approach the CGA will never offer the protection it was intended to simply because too much interpretation is involved and human nature will be to avoid the cost if at all possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it goes to Disputes Tribunal, there are no lawyers involved for each side. Its a low cot service, so its accessible.

 

Accessible, yes, but still an imposition on your time, energy and resources.

I personally prefer companies that offer no quibble lifetime warranty, but to be fair most of those come from US companies who recognise the benefit of that to their sales and reputation.

 

no quibble lifetime warranty

 

Thats an option. What would the cost be? Say a $10 toaster. Its going to fail. Say every 3 years. so $10 toaster x 20 years? The manufacturer will get $10 from you and pay $200. So pay a lifetime fee if $125? $400 toaster, you need to hope it will last 20 years. 

 

OR, lets do what software does, rent everything. At the end of gar day the manufacturer has to make a profit. Would you sell products that have lifetime warranties? No way. It works as a consumer though, but thats selfish.

 

I've got rifle scopes, binoculars, tools, knives, luggage and a spotting scope, all of which have lifetime warranty.

For example, Burris rifle scopes:

"Every Burris optic is covered by the Burris Forever Warranty™. We will repair or replace your Burris optic if it is damaged or defective. The warranty is automatically transferred to future owners.

No repair or replacement charge
No warranty card needed
No receipt needed
No questions asked
The Burris Forever Warranty does not cover loss, theft, deliberate damage or cosmetic damage that does not hinder the performance of the product."

Mine cost NZ$400.

Scopes??? Knives???  You probably can't get a worse comparison. Moving parts, electrical wear? The parts that matter are protected.