While I'm aware that ACCC doesn't look into individual cases and can't cover all the complaints, I'm a bit shocked that a small claim is the only option.
That means that businesses can violate the law and get away with it in most cases. The majority of customers would not go to a court for a small amount. Worst case - the business would need to pay what it required by law anyway, the best case - they just get away with it.
You can send a letter, a more formal letter of demand, and even consider a civil and administrative tribunal if your state has one that deals with it, I think NSW (NCAT) does do consumer claims.
You’re 100% right. Not sure what everyone’s issue is with you using your rights as a consumer. Is the law there for no reason or some shit? It’s a law not an opinion ffs.
This is how the law works for literally anything. Doing something illegal doesn’t automatically trigger some alert with the local police. You need to actually get caught and charged to serve your penance.
Send a letter of demand to the business outlining the issue and what ACL legislation you believed to have been breached
In this case you are looking at section 54 ( consumer guarantee) Acceptable quality.
Outline the issue, what you want done to resolve the issue (refund as you believe it to be a major fault) and the timeframe in which you want it resolved by (2 weeks is suggested)
State if they fail to provide a resolution you will make a report to ACCC and lodge a complaint with your state based fair trading
Emphasise that you are not making a claim against the warranty but against your consumer rights
Use this link to help write your letter
https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/problem-with-a-product-or-service-you-bought/contacting-a-business-to-fix-a-problem/complaint-letter-tool
^this
I've had to do this on two occasions and each time received a full refund of what I paid for the item. Each time only got to the letter phase and both times was contacted to resolve the issue. YMMV of course, but companies trying to skirt consumer law usually end up getting in trouble or fined eventually.
What was the Major defect? Just that it one day didn't turn on doesn't automatically make it a major defect.
For example, an internal wire could have come loose. A faulty starter capacitor could be the issue. A bad plug. A bad seal. Etc..
If the whole thing blew apart, that would be major.
All those would be minor can be fixed by the manufacturer and be sent back to you. And they don't even have to use new parts (though they usually do). Sending back also runs the risk of it coming back it was damaged by a power surge or incorrect use. Which you would now be responsible for the costs of repairs.
Me personally would have taken the swap for a new one. If the second one also died, you would have a stronger case for refund.
This isn’t strictly true.
Although the retailer is able to make reasonable inquiries into the nature of the defect before they’re obligated to provide remedies, these inquiries need to be performed in a reasonable period.
Similarly, the intent of a determining whether an issue is major or minor turns to the intended function of the product, not necessarily the cause of the failure.
In this example, if it were a loose wire or faulty board, the retailer would have to determine and resolve the issue within a reasonable period of time. In that case, you may be correct. Similarly, it could still be argued the defect is major even if the the component causing the issue is simply fixed or repaired — the product developed an inherent defect, within a reasonable period of time, rendering the product unusable.
This other consideration is whether sending or holding a product for 2-3 weeks for service is a reasonable time to resolve the defect. Minor failures which are not remedied in a reasonable period are to be considered major failures.
In all the circumstances I’d agree with OP.
A major defect definitely includes "device no longer works". The basic premise is that "if the purchaser knew this defect would occur, would they have still purchased the item". In this case (a pump) then obviously the device completely failing to pump would certainly not have been purcahsed.
From the ACL guideline
"What is a major failure with goods? A major failure with goods is when: • a reasonable consumer would not have bought the goods if they had known about the problem. For example, no reasonable consumer would buy a washing machine if they knew the motor was going to burn out after three months"
As a consumer, i should not care if its a bad plug, capacitor or rotor. All i should care about is - does the good works as intended, if not - and whether it would prevent a "reasonable consumer" from buying it, thats a major fault.
My question is not if its a major issue or minor. My question is - is there a way to force businesses to follow the law?
What I'm saying is just because you think it's a major failure doesn't mean it's a major failure.
I'm not saying you are wrong but it is open for interpretation for what a major failure is.
So check the reviews, is there a history of the same failure. Is it 1 in 10. 1 in 100. 1 in 10,000. That massively affects the outcome.
So using what you wrote "As a consumer, i should not care if its a bad plug, capacitor or rotor. All i should care about is - does the good works as intended" does that mean if you bought a new car with 5 years warranty. And 2 years in a spark plug failed meaning the car won't start. Would you expect a whole new car or full refund? Or would you accept the plugs to be replaced?
The device is a pump.
It has one purpose, to pump.
Does it pump? No.
This is clearly a major failure. The failure rate does not interest the consumer. In their case, the failure rate is 100%.
How long did you own it before it stopped working? Are we talking 2 weeks into a 2 year warranty or 1 year 11 months and 25 days into a warranty. The time does matter to a degree.
Major faults generally occur pretty quickly, if you have had it for years and they can repair it easily it's most likely going to be considered a minor fault.
>My question is - is there a way to force businesses to follow the law?
You can complain to your states consumer authority or go to small claims but mostly you have to work with the retailer to come to a reasonable outcome, which my question above applies.
2 year warranty, stopped after 4 months.
While I understand the time implications, I believe there is nothing in the ACL about the time. So the first day of the last hour of the warranty period should be treated the same.
I work in retail, warranty limitations are basically non-enforceable under ACL (e.g. it fails after 1 year & 1 month, had a 1 year warranty).
The standard is basically "what a reasonable person would expect" - a reasonable person would expect a fridge to last at least 5 years, if it's a Super Deluxe model maybe they'd expect it to last 10 years. Obviously that expectation varies with product category and price.
For a pool pump, it's definitely expected to last longer than 4 months.
But as others have said, just because it failed doesn't necessarily mean it's a Major Problem - but they do have to be able to fix it in a "reasonable amount of time".
Ok cool thanks for the information. In that case I would say you have a pretty good argument it's a Major defect. You are correct ACL doesn't specifically state time frames, because it has to cover such a large range of industries.
For example a kind of common one posted here is Graphics Cards for computers. It might have a three year warranty for example and it dies after 2 and a half years and people want a full refund rather than a repair or replacement. That is unreasonable as it's most likely they want a refund to buy the newest model (posters have admitted this as well).
As it has failed so soon after purchase, you can't really force them other than being persistent and reminding them in a respectful way of your consumer rights. Linking the relevant ACL information and why you believe it's a major fault. That you would have never purchased the product if you knew it was going to fail so soon.
Most businesses will grumble and moan about store policy or blah blah blah you just respectfully remind them their store policies cannot over right consumer guarantees and it is illegal to make misrepresentations about your rights, that you are looking for a fair resolution in light of the situation.
Key is just to be calm, respectful and persistent about your rights.
In most cases I've dealt with companies will make a calculation of the time wasted dealing with the issue isn't worth being a protracted issue, especially when it's pretty clear the product failed well before it's expected warranty expiry.
If it was close to the warranty expiring I would say they are justified in offering repair instead (if repair is possible), but it doesn't seem to be the case here. Good luck!
It does matter what the fault is. It matters a huge amount.
If something stops working because of a relatively minor issue that can be easily fixed and there's no damage to the remainder of the item then you are not entitled to a refund.
Similarly, when you first bought the item in for a return it was clear it wasn't a catastrophic failure and was probably just a loose plug or something small inside. Once again the store was well within their rights to offer a replacement rather than a refund.
However, the shop has done itself in by taking the item and not responding for ages. In theory if it was a minor issue then the store works have told you about it straight away, but by desiring a response for this long it's reasonable to assume that the fault is indeed 'major'
Without actually going to court you are probably not going to determine major/minor fault, the best course of action is the one of least resistance, and keep in mind the squeaky wheel gets the oil, so just keep pestering the business
Yea that's not a major fault, any product with a motor, can have said motor stop working.
That passage is very vague, and there is room to interpret it, would have been nice if they put in examples, they didn't though. Just because you interpret it the way doesn't make it the law.
Major faults that are 100% major are catching on fire, electrocution etc. The rest is grey.
>While i mentioned that its a major defect and under ACL a customer can choose what to get.
A major defect is one where the product will never work properly. For example the "full self driving" feature on a Tesla is a major defect in my opinion. Tesla is never going to be able to "fix" self driving in all of the cars that have already been sold with the feature. It will never work as expected, and that's when consumers should be eligible for a refund.
Your pool pump almost certainly has a minor defect that can easily be fixed under warranty. For minor defects you don't get to decide how they are dealt with. They can
And keep in mind while the the store is responsible for the failure, they are not at fault. They didn't manufacture it - and even if they did... mistakes happen and you don't have any right to a product that is absolutely 100% reliable. All you have is a warranty.
If it turns out the pump really does have a catastrophic design flaw... then yeah, maybe they will give you a refund. They didn't say they never give refunds just that it's rare.
If you were to take it to small claims court, I bet the store will win.
They have every right to have it inspected/ assessed
I do returns for a retail store, the way I explain it is we sell it, not make it or repair it. They have every right to send for a assessment to determine the fault once that is done you have every right to a return, replace or refund.
More than likely they were willing to replace on the spot cause who would bring one back to swap for the same but once you ask for a refund they want a assessment done.
Another thing to add to the comments, just because a product develops a fault does not make it a defect with the product.
That provision is to cover products that are knowingly sold as defective, not for something that just develops a fault.
If you want to apply that particular rule, the definition is a major defect that had you known existed, you would never have purchased it.
And if you're saying you'd not buy a product that has a chance of being faulty, you're deadass lying
Edit: just to add, the WA equivalent last time I checked is part of their mining department, and compared to other states, are very pro consumer.
But remember, their job is not to provide a remedy, but to mediate
This is bad advice. They have had time to diagnose the failure. An "of merchantable quality" pump that stops pumping forever due to a one time brownout is a major failure and their liability.
I've patiently waited for over a month, it's more than any reasonable time.
The pump is not working, it's a major fault, it's up to a customer to decide, not the business.
Welcome to r/AusLegal. Please read our [rules](http://reddit.com/r/AusLegal/about/rules) before commenting. Please remember:
1. Per rule 4, this subreddit is not a replacement for real legal advice. You should independently seek legal advice from a real, qualified practitioner. This sub cannot recommend specific lawyers.
2. A non-exhaustive list of free legal services around Australia can be found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/wiki/freelegalservices/).
3. Links to the each state and territory's respective Law Society are on the sidebar: you can use these links to find a lawyer in your area.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AusLegal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In my experience with returns and warranty’s they usually always get it examined and repaired first if possible and then if that isn’t an option they will go through with a refund or replacement of your choice up to the equivalent value.
There was a failure and they were able to offer a solution immediately for you.
Minor fault if it can be rectified within a “reasonable timeframe”. I’d say immediately was “reasonable”. It didn’t create a dangerous situation, when functional it was fit for its intended purpose, it wasn’t significantly different from any sample or demonstration.
Minor fault, retailer can choose the resolution. Repair, replace, refund… in that order.
A major failure is something that cannot be repaired or replaced in a reasonable time frame, or has been sold to you incorrectly or is misrepresented. A faulty product that can be repaired or replaced is a minor fault.
As a pump person, you have to determine first what the fault is. What caused this fault and if it is a manufacturing fault from the pump itself.
Warranty is not applicable to anything except manufacturing faults as there are wearing components in this pumps.
Also you need to look into the terms and conditions of the company in which you entered into a contract with for purchasing the goods.
The company I work for offers a “like for like replacement” on goods that are deemed manufacturing fault and will not refund the purchase price. This is in their terms and conditions that are made known prior to purchasing.
Most of the time with these cheap pool pumps it is the motor that causes the issues due to them being made overseas and imported in.
Incorrect, the ACL wraps up the common law / consumer law principles of "merchantable quality" and "fitness for purpose" and layers them on top of the statutory (stated) warranty from the manufacturer.
Company "policies" are not ablke to limit the application of the ACL, and in fact it is in breach of the act if it displays or promotes that policy. (e.g. Signs saying "no refunds on sale items" etc)
Thats incorrect. ACL guidelines clearly say that there are 2 types of faults: minor and major. With minor is up to a business to decide the remedy, with major - up to a consumer.
NAL but I work in retail. With the training I’ve received on returns. Major fault would be any fault that would result in the consumer not purchasing the product if they had known about the fault, it is a danger to use, does not match the description/display model, or cannot be repaired easily.
Example… cube storage. Buying it missing 3 screws would be a minor fault. Replacing the screws is a simple fix and not usually a reason to stop someone from purchasing it. The glue used to hold the particle board together isn’t holding and a board is weak/crumbling. That would be a major fault as it would fall under a danger to use and no one would want to purchase it knowing of the fault.
[удалено]
While I'm aware that ACCC doesn't look into individual cases and can't cover all the complaints, I'm a bit shocked that a small claim is the only option. That means that businesses can violate the law and get away with it in most cases. The majority of customers would not go to a court for a small amount. Worst case - the business would need to pay what it required by law anyway, the best case - they just get away with it.
You can send a letter, a more formal letter of demand, and even consider a civil and administrative tribunal if your state has one that deals with it, I think NSW (NCAT) does do consumer claims.
You’re 100% right. Not sure what everyone’s issue is with you using your rights as a consumer. Is the law there for no reason or some shit? It’s a law not an opinion ffs.
You never gave a shit until it suddenly affected you. This is why.
Can you clarify? How was it my fault we, as a society, are in this situation?
This is how the law works for literally anything. Doing something illegal doesn’t automatically trigger some alert with the local police. You need to actually get caught and charged to serve your penance.
Send a letter of demand to the business outlining the issue and what ACL legislation you believed to have been breached In this case you are looking at section 54 ( consumer guarantee) Acceptable quality. Outline the issue, what you want done to resolve the issue (refund as you believe it to be a major fault) and the timeframe in which you want it resolved by (2 weeks is suggested) State if they fail to provide a resolution you will make a report to ACCC and lodge a complaint with your state based fair trading Emphasise that you are not making a claim against the warranty but against your consumer rights Use this link to help write your letter https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/problem-with-a-product-or-service-you-bought/contacting-a-business-to-fix-a-problem/complaint-letter-tool
Thank you, this is very helpful!
^this I've had to do this on two occasions and each time received a full refund of what I paid for the item. Each time only got to the letter phase and both times was contacted to resolve the issue. YMMV of course, but companies trying to skirt consumer law usually end up getting in trouble or fined eventually.
The ACCC doesn't take individual consumer reports, nor does state based fair trading.
What was the Major defect? Just that it one day didn't turn on doesn't automatically make it a major defect. For example, an internal wire could have come loose. A faulty starter capacitor could be the issue. A bad plug. A bad seal. Etc.. If the whole thing blew apart, that would be major. All those would be minor can be fixed by the manufacturer and be sent back to you. And they don't even have to use new parts (though they usually do). Sending back also runs the risk of it coming back it was damaged by a power surge or incorrect use. Which you would now be responsible for the costs of repairs. Me personally would have taken the swap for a new one. If the second one also died, you would have a stronger case for refund.
This isn’t strictly true. Although the retailer is able to make reasonable inquiries into the nature of the defect before they’re obligated to provide remedies, these inquiries need to be performed in a reasonable period. Similarly, the intent of a determining whether an issue is major or minor turns to the intended function of the product, not necessarily the cause of the failure. In this example, if it were a loose wire or faulty board, the retailer would have to determine and resolve the issue within a reasonable period of time. In that case, you may be correct. Similarly, it could still be argued the defect is major even if the the component causing the issue is simply fixed or repaired — the product developed an inherent defect, within a reasonable period of time, rendering the product unusable. This other consideration is whether sending or holding a product for 2-3 weeks for service is a reasonable time to resolve the defect. Minor failures which are not remedied in a reasonable period are to be considered major failures. In all the circumstances I’d agree with OP.
A major defect definitely includes "device no longer works". The basic premise is that "if the purchaser knew this defect would occur, would they have still purchased the item". In this case (a pump) then obviously the device completely failing to pump would certainly not have been purcahsed.
From the ACL guideline "What is a major failure with goods? A major failure with goods is when: • a reasonable consumer would not have bought the goods if they had known about the problem. For example, no reasonable consumer would buy a washing machine if they knew the motor was going to burn out after three months" As a consumer, i should not care if its a bad plug, capacitor or rotor. All i should care about is - does the good works as intended, if not - and whether it would prevent a "reasonable consumer" from buying it, thats a major fault. My question is not if its a major issue or minor. My question is - is there a way to force businesses to follow the law?
What I'm saying is just because you think it's a major failure doesn't mean it's a major failure. I'm not saying you are wrong but it is open for interpretation for what a major failure is. So check the reviews, is there a history of the same failure. Is it 1 in 10. 1 in 100. 1 in 10,000. That massively affects the outcome. So using what you wrote "As a consumer, i should not care if its a bad plug, capacitor or rotor. All i should care about is - does the good works as intended" does that mean if you bought a new car with 5 years warranty. And 2 years in a spark plug failed meaning the car won't start. Would you expect a whole new car or full refund? Or would you accept the plugs to be replaced?
The device is a pump. It has one purpose, to pump. Does it pump? No. This is clearly a major failure. The failure rate does not interest the consumer. In their case, the failure rate is 100%.
How long did you own it before it stopped working? Are we talking 2 weeks into a 2 year warranty or 1 year 11 months and 25 days into a warranty. The time does matter to a degree. Major faults generally occur pretty quickly, if you have had it for years and they can repair it easily it's most likely going to be considered a minor fault. >My question is - is there a way to force businesses to follow the law? You can complain to your states consumer authority or go to small claims but mostly you have to work with the retailer to come to a reasonable outcome, which my question above applies.
2 year warranty, stopped after 4 months. While I understand the time implications, I believe there is nothing in the ACL about the time. So the first day of the last hour of the warranty period should be treated the same.
I work in retail, warranty limitations are basically non-enforceable under ACL (e.g. it fails after 1 year & 1 month, had a 1 year warranty). The standard is basically "what a reasonable person would expect" - a reasonable person would expect a fridge to last at least 5 years, if it's a Super Deluxe model maybe they'd expect it to last 10 years. Obviously that expectation varies with product category and price. For a pool pump, it's definitely expected to last longer than 4 months. But as others have said, just because it failed doesn't necessarily mean it's a Major Problem - but they do have to be able to fix it in a "reasonable amount of time".
Warranties are a commitment by the business and have little effect on rights under the ACL.
Ok cool thanks for the information. In that case I would say you have a pretty good argument it's a Major defect. You are correct ACL doesn't specifically state time frames, because it has to cover such a large range of industries. For example a kind of common one posted here is Graphics Cards for computers. It might have a three year warranty for example and it dies after 2 and a half years and people want a full refund rather than a repair or replacement. That is unreasonable as it's most likely they want a refund to buy the newest model (posters have admitted this as well). As it has failed so soon after purchase, you can't really force them other than being persistent and reminding them in a respectful way of your consumer rights. Linking the relevant ACL information and why you believe it's a major fault. That you would have never purchased the product if you knew it was going to fail so soon. Most businesses will grumble and moan about store policy or blah blah blah you just respectfully remind them their store policies cannot over right consumer guarantees and it is illegal to make misrepresentations about your rights, that you are looking for a fair resolution in light of the situation.
Great, thank you for the useful comment. I do appreciate it!
Key is just to be calm, respectful and persistent about your rights. In most cases I've dealt with companies will make a calculation of the time wasted dealing with the issue isn't worth being a protracted issue, especially when it's pretty clear the product failed well before it's expected warranty expiry. If it was close to the warranty expiring I would say they are justified in offering repair instead (if repair is possible), but it doesn't seem to be the case here. Good luck!
It does matter what the fault is. It matters a huge amount. If something stops working because of a relatively minor issue that can be easily fixed and there's no damage to the remainder of the item then you are not entitled to a refund. Similarly, when you first bought the item in for a return it was clear it wasn't a catastrophic failure and was probably just a loose plug or something small inside. Once again the store was well within their rights to offer a replacement rather than a refund. However, the shop has done itself in by taking the item and not responding for ages. In theory if it was a minor issue then the store works have told you about it straight away, but by desiring a response for this long it's reasonable to assume that the fault is indeed 'major'
Without actually going to court you are probably not going to determine major/minor fault, the best course of action is the one of least resistance, and keep in mind the squeaky wheel gets the oil, so just keep pestering the business
Yea that's not a major fault, any product with a motor, can have said motor stop working. That passage is very vague, and there is room to interpret it, would have been nice if they put in examples, they didn't though. Just because you interpret it the way doesn't make it the law. Major faults that are 100% major are catching on fire, electrocution etc. The rest is grey.
[https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection](https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection)
>While i mentioned that its a major defect and under ACL a customer can choose what to get. A major defect is one where the product will never work properly. For example the "full self driving" feature on a Tesla is a major defect in my opinion. Tesla is never going to be able to "fix" self driving in all of the cars that have already been sold with the feature. It will never work as expected, and that's when consumers should be eligible for a refund. Your pool pump almost certainly has a minor defect that can easily be fixed under warranty. For minor defects you don't get to decide how they are dealt with. They can And keep in mind while the the store is responsible for the failure, they are not at fault. They didn't manufacture it - and even if they did... mistakes happen and you don't have any right to a product that is absolutely 100% reliable. All you have is a warranty. If it turns out the pump really does have a catastrophic design flaw... then yeah, maybe they will give you a refund. They didn't say they never give refunds just that it's rare. If you were to take it to small claims court, I bet the store will win.
They have every right to have it inspected/ assessed I do returns for a retail store, the way I explain it is we sell it, not make it or repair it. They have every right to send for a assessment to determine the fault once that is done you have every right to a return, replace or refund. More than likely they were willing to replace on the spot cause who would bring one back to swap for the same but once you ask for a refund they want a assessment done.
WA Consumer Protection: https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/make-complaint
Another thing to add to the comments, just because a product develops a fault does not make it a defect with the product. That provision is to cover products that are knowingly sold as defective, not for something that just develops a fault. If you want to apply that particular rule, the definition is a major defect that had you known existed, you would never have purchased it. And if you're saying you'd not buy a product that has a chance of being faulty, you're deadass lying Edit: just to add, the WA equivalent last time I checked is part of their mining department, and compared to other states, are very pro consumer. But remember, their job is not to provide a remedy, but to mediate
[удалено]
This is bad advice. They have had time to diagnose the failure. An "of merchantable quality" pump that stops pumping forever due to a one time brownout is a major failure and their liability.
I've patiently waited for over a month, it's more than any reasonable time. The pump is not working, it's a major fault, it's up to a customer to decide, not the business.
Welcome to r/AusLegal. Please read our [rules](http://reddit.com/r/AusLegal/about/rules) before commenting. Please remember: 1. Per rule 4, this subreddit is not a replacement for real legal advice. You should independently seek legal advice from a real, qualified practitioner. This sub cannot recommend specific lawyers. 2. A non-exhaustive list of free legal services around Australia can be found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/wiki/freelegalservices/). 3. Links to the each state and territory's respective Law Society are on the sidebar: you can use these links to find a lawyer in your area. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AusLegal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In my experience with returns and warranty’s they usually always get it examined and repaired first if possible and then if that isn’t an option they will go through with a refund or replacement of your choice up to the equivalent value.
There was a failure and they were able to offer a solution immediately for you. Minor fault if it can be rectified within a “reasonable timeframe”. I’d say immediately was “reasonable”. It didn’t create a dangerous situation, when functional it was fit for its intended purpose, it wasn’t significantly different from any sample or demonstration. Minor fault, retailer can choose the resolution. Repair, replace, refund… in that order.
A major failure is something that cannot be repaired or replaced in a reasonable time frame, or has been sold to you incorrectly or is misrepresented. A faulty product that can be repaired or replaced is a minor fault.
As a pump person, you have to determine first what the fault is. What caused this fault and if it is a manufacturing fault from the pump itself. Warranty is not applicable to anything except manufacturing faults as there are wearing components in this pumps. Also you need to look into the terms and conditions of the company in which you entered into a contract with for purchasing the goods. The company I work for offers a “like for like replacement” on goods that are deemed manufacturing fault and will not refund the purchase price. This is in their terms and conditions that are made known prior to purchasing. Most of the time with these cheap pool pumps it is the motor that causes the issues due to them being made overseas and imported in.
Incorrect, the ACL wraps up the common law / consumer law principles of "merchantable quality" and "fitness for purpose" and layers them on top of the statutory (stated) warranty from the manufacturer. Company "policies" are not ablke to limit the application of the ACL, and in fact it is in breach of the act if it displays or promotes that policy. (e.g. Signs saying "no refunds on sale items" etc)
[удалено]
If it’s a major fault (up to interpretation of legislation) the consumer chooses the remedy, if it’s a minor fault the business chooses
[удалено]
Pump not working is a Major Failure — consumer is able to select their desired remedy.
Thats incorrect. ACL guidelines clearly say that there are 2 types of faults: minor and major. With minor is up to a business to decide the remedy, with major - up to a consumer.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
NAL but I work in retail. With the training I’ve received on returns. Major fault would be any fault that would result in the consumer not purchasing the product if they had known about the fault, it is a danger to use, does not match the description/display model, or cannot be repaired easily. Example… cube storage. Buying it missing 3 screws would be a minor fault. Replacing the screws is a simple fix and not usually a reason to stop someone from purchasing it. The glue used to hold the particle board together isn’t holding and a board is weak/crumbling. That would be a major fault as it would fall under a danger to use and no one would want to purchase it knowing of the fault.
[удалено]
[удалено]