nofam: Sorry - I was a bit loose with my terminology there - I meant the jacket retailer (they're also the importer - no idea who the overseas manufacturer is). And yes, that's my contention - under sections 6 & 12 of the CGA, they have obligations to provide goods of acceptable quality, and also to have spare parts available for a reasonable period of time (or contract out of this by advising they don't at time-of-purchase - which they didn't do).
I've already told them I'll be taking this further if need be, and that I don't believe I'm being unreasonable in my claim.
The importer takes that responsibility if it's not produced in NZ, they can't just import it then tell you to deal with the manufacturer overseas.
nofam: Thanks for all the advice and encouragement guys - the latest is that the jacket supplier is seeking advice from their lawyer, and will abide by whatever they recommend.
Fingers crossed for a positive, amicable outcome!
I'm amazed that the seller has gone as far as seeking advice from their lawyer, given the cost of the product appears to be in the range of $200-250. Taking into account the amount of time the retailer must have already spent dealing with this, and now potentially having to hand over money for legal advice, just from a pragmatic perspective their intransigence doesn't make sense. To then potentially let it drag on into the Disputes Tribunal will again cost them time (which surely, from a commerical point of view, must equal money?) would be more stupid still.
And that, of course, ignores the already well-canvased arguments earlier in this thread that they appear to denying you your rights unde the CGA...
Let us know what happens in the end! I'd also be interested to know who the retailer is (PM me if you're not keen on sharing in public!), as clearly this is one company I'd rather avoid dealing with.
So I'm happy to report that I'm being given a full refund on the jacket, on advice from the company's lawyer. Great to see that logic has prevailed.
Shame it took them several months and likely-considerable legal costs to confirm what was a pretty open & shut application of the CGA. And not a single apology for any inconvenience caused.
nofam: So I'm happy to report that I'm being given a full refund on the jacket, on advice from the company's lawyer. Great to see that logic has prevailed.
Shame it took them several months and likely-considerable legal costs to confirm what was a pretty open & shut application of the CGA. And not a single apology for any inconvenience caused.
Needless to say, they've lost a customer.
Please Name and Shame so we can also avoid them.
Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
nofam: So I'm happy to report that I'm being given a full refund on the jacket, on advice from the company's lawyer. Great to see that logic has prevailed.
Shame it took them several months and likely-considerable legal costs to confirm what was a pretty open & shut application of the CGA. And not a single apology for any inconvenience caused.
Needless to say, they've lost a customer.
Please Name and Shame so we can also avoid them.
www.1tonne.co.nz - I thought long and hard about posting this, as it was never my intention to be punitive, but I think people have a right to know what to expect before purchasing.
On the whole, their products and service are good, and I've recommended them before to others, but I won't be any more.
Being a retailer is actually pretty easy if you have good products, but it's the 'putting right' of issues that separates the ok from the excellent, and as we all know, you only see a business's true colours when issues arise.
nofam: So I'm happy to report that I'm being given a full refund on the jacket, on advice from the company's lawyer. Great to see that logic has prevailed.
Shame it took them several months and likely-considerable legal costs to confirm what was a pretty open & shut application of the CGA. And not a single apology for any inconvenience caused.
Needless to say, they've lost a customer.
Please Name and Shame so we can also avoid them.
www.1tonne.co.nz - I thought long and hard about posting this, as it was never my intention to be punitive, but I think people have a right to know what to expect before purchasing.
On the whole, their products and service are good, and I've recommended them before to others, but I won't be any more.
Being a retailer is actually pretty easy if you have good products, but it's the 'putting right' of issues that separates the ok from the excellent, and as we all know, you only see a business's true colours when issues arise.
You aren't talking crap about them or anything. You've just gone through a painful process and sharing their name only makes sense so some other may not have to live the same process.
Having a NZ presence they should understand that 3 months is not a reasonable time to expect a product of that price to last and its clearly not fit for purpose. So they shouldn't have put you through the ringer like that, and definitely shouldn't have bothered with a lawyer when its that damn cut and dry.
yeah had dealings with them before. Their stuff is good for maybe a season as far as waterproofing is concerned. My last jackets waterproof liner is pretty close to had it. Owned it since the beginning of winter. It seems to last longer than comparable items in the same price bracket. But in saying that my old teknik jackets waterproof layer lasted 5+ years but cost a premium price.
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
