Jump to content


Does the SOGA apply to this case?


ABN555
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3930 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

Brought a camera at beginning of September which turned out to be faulty and was replaced without problem.

 

The zoom of the replacement camera however is noticeable noisier than the original, although it is claimed that it is still within the manufactures specification and as such not faulty.

 

Does the fact that the replacement camera, although perhaps not faulty, does not perform as well as the original give me the right to reject it and ask for anther replacement or full refund?

 

Second issue I have is that the serial number of the replacement camera would indicate it was from a much earlier batch and as such I feel it may well be a previously returned or refurbish one. The retailer strongly denies this. Is there a way to get the history of the camera? I have e-mailed the manufacturer but not had a reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A replacement provided by a supplier is not a second purchase. The terms of the SOGA apply to the replacement as if it were the original purchase. Whether or not it is better or worse than what you had before is beside the point.

 

The burden of proof over this sort of thing is on the seller, up until the point where a criminal offence is alleged, which it is if a supplier claims that a refurbished item is a good as new, so the fact of the matter would be for you to prove. With the fact established it is then a strict liability offence, which is to say that it is then for the supplier to defend himself, if possible. Perhaps he was himself deceived by somebody else.

 

If a business makes a habit of falsely representing, that would be a matter for Trading Standards to enforce, so whether or not what you "feel" is enough to persuade them to spend the time is a matter for them to decide.

 

If you're taking bets, I doubt it.

 

:whoo:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...