Slightly different CGA query

Forums › Off topic › Slightly different CGA query

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#191395 3-Feb-2016 09:04

I've got a Consumer Guarantees Act query slightly different from the normal "My thing broke through no fault of mine. Should it be fixed for free?" one.

My understanding of the CGA is that it also legislates that products sold in New Zealand need to have a decent amount of serviceable parts available. As stated here.

Guarantee as to repairs and spare parts

(1)Subject to sections 41 and 42, where goods are first supplied to a consumer in New Zealand (whether or not that supply is the first-ever supply of the goods), there is a guarantee that the manufacturer will take reasonable action to ensure that facilities for repair of the goods and supply of parts for the goods are reasonably available for a reasonable period after the goods are so supplied

(2)Part 3 gives the consumer a right of redress against the manufacturer where the goods fail to comply with the guarantee in this section.

We are in a rental property, and we foolishly placed aluminium foil on the bottom of the oven cavity. An ingrained habit which is no longer acceptable with modern ovens. So we've now decorated the bottom of the oven cavity with baked on aluminium foil. Totally our fault, and we're happy to pay to get it fixed.

We contacted the manufacturer (Westinghouse), and they told us that they don't carry the oven liner as a spare part for that model, so our only course of action is to replace the oven with a new one (RRP $2100).

I spoke to an authorised Westinghouse appliance repairer, and he told me that if the part is available he could fix it for $400-$600.

In this instance are Westinghouse shirking their responsibilities under the CGA?

1 | 2 | 3

1043 posts

Uber Geek

#1484144 3-Feb-2016 09:26

Wisdom on the net is that naval jelly works - you need to leave it on for a few days.

http://www.amazon.com/Loctite-553472-Fluid-Ounce-Dissolver/dp/B000C016OC

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1484147 3-Feb-2016 09:31

That might depend on the age of the oven, hence the "reasonable period" wording.

Have you tried anything to clean the foil? Some googling reveals that it may be possible to "dissolve" the foil using Sodium Hydroxide (or a strong oven cleaner that contains it) or Lye. One person swears by a product with the wonderful name of naval jelly which is apparently used to remove rust from metal.

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484153 3-Feb-2016 09:39

andrew027:

That might depend on the age of the oven, hence the "reasonable period" wording.

Have you tried anything to clean the foil? Some googling reveals that it may be possible to "dissolve" the foil using Sodium Hydroxide (or a strong oven cleaner that contains it) or Lye. One person swears by a product with the wonderful name of naval jelly which is apparently used to remove rust from metal.

Oven is less than 6 months old. It's a new house.

We've tried to remove it using a ceramic cooktop scraper, and Jif. No dice.

One repairer told me that attempts to remove the aluminium foil may cause scratching which will result in rusting down the track. But it may be a course of action worth pursuing.

In any case, a replacement via insurance should only set us back our $300 excess. But I still found it interesting that Westinghouse's stance is that it can't be fixed. Seems like such a waste when the only real issue is with the internal oven lining.

gbwelly

1243 posts

Uber Geek

#1484158 3-Feb-2016 09:44

I will gamble that an oven cleaner based on sodium hydroxide will do the trick. As a bored child I used to do the horrendously (in hindsight) dangerous activity of putting aluminium foil into a dish of caustic soda and setting the resulting hydrogen on fire. How I managed to not get flaming caustic soda in my eyes I don't know. Anyway, that stuff races through aluminium.

wellygary

8321 posts

Uber Geek

#1484167 3-Feb-2016 09:55

dclegg:

One repairer told me that attempts to remove the aluminium foil may cause scratching which will result in rusting down the track. But it may be a course of action worth pursuing.

Unlikely. The oven liner "should" be steel that is enamel coated,

Tomato Sauce or Cola also work a treat at dissolving alu foil...

Journeyman

1186 posts

Uber Geek

#1484171 3-Feb-2016 09:59

"available for a reasonable period after the goods are so supplied"

How old is the oven?

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484175 3-Feb-2016 10:03

Journeyman:

"available for a reasonable period after the goods are so supplied"

How old is the oven?

Less than 6 months old. It's a new house.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484176 3-Feb-2016 10:04

wellygary:

Tomato Sauce or Cola also work a treat at dissolving alu foil...

Tomato sauce? Sounds like a science experiment may be in order :-)

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484179 3-Feb-2016 10:06

Yes if the oven is 6 months old, then they have to have parts available (Or replace the oven free of charge if they can't supply parts in a reasonable timeframe).

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484183 3-Feb-2016 10:11

networkn:

Yes if the oven is 6 months old, then they have to have parts available (Or replace the oven free of charge if they can't supply parts in a reasonable timeframe).

Could they claim that the oven liner is not a serviceable part, I wonder? Although they definitely stated that it isn't able to be changed because they don't keep that part in stock (which would tend to contradict that).

And from a pragmatic standpoint, it may well be easier for us to get a full replacement via insurance. The repair has been quoted as $400 - $600 (subject to parts availability), and our excess is only $300.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484184 3-Feb-2016 10:13

dclegg:

networkn:

Yes if the oven is 6 months old, then they have to have parts available (Or replace the oven free of charge if they can't supply parts in a reasonable timeframe).

Could they claim that the oven liner is not a serviceable part, I wonder? Although they definitely stated that it isn't able to be changed because they don't keep that part in stock (which would tend to contradict that).

And from a pragmatic standpoint, it may well be easier for us to get a full replacement via insurance. The repair has been quoted as $400 - $600 (subject to parts availability), and our excess is only $300.

Right, but don't forget the loss of no claims bonus which raises your premiums. If I was your landlord, I'd be pretty keen to ensure that the "fix" whatever it was left me in as least a good of a position as I would have been without you doing the foil thing. If positions were swapped what would you consider

suitable? I'd imagine replacement.

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484190 3-Feb-2016 10:26

networkn:

Right, but don't forget the loss of no claims bonus which raises your premiums.

Yep, that's a fair point

If I was your landlord, I'd be pretty keen to ensure that the "fix" whatever it was left me in as least a good of a position as I would have been without you doing the foil thing. If positions were swapped what would you consider suitable? I'd imagine replacement.

Don't get me wrong, we definitely want to do right by the landlord. But it should be sufficient to simply replace the cavity. That is the only part that was damaged. Replacing the whole oven would go above and beyond our obligations.

The fact that the manufacturer is making this difficult is a worrying trend in this increasingly throwaway consumer culture.

Jase2985

13461 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1484192 3-Feb-2016 10:27

but the goods are not faulty, and how often would an oven liner fail?

what's happened is unfortunate but I don't see how it would be a CGA issue

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484193 3-Feb-2016 10:28

dclegg:

Don't get me wrong, we definitely want to do right by the landlord. But it should be sufficient to simply replace the cavity. That is the only part that was damaged. Replacing the whole oven would go above and beyond our obligations.

The fact that the manufacturer is making this difficult is a worrying trend in this increasingly throwaway consumer culture.

Right, the thing I was denoting however, is unintended negative long term effects of "fixing" it. Acid/scratching etc, to get the foil off, may not affect the oven for a while, but eventually it might.

If you can replace the part safely and properly, then yup, agreed you have done your part. (BTW I wasn't suggesting you wouldn't do the right thing).

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484194 3-Feb-2016 10:29

Jase2985:

but the goods are not faulty, and how often would an oven liner fail?

what's happened is unfortunate but I don't see how it would be a CGA issue

Doesn't need to be a FAULT, manufacturers are required to keep reasonable stock of replacement parts.

1 | 2 | 3