Weird warranty

[Rik]

I'm still salivating over the Eizo monitor this morning, it really does look stunning - and having a number of modes available means that I can 'relax' it for browsing or WP, while having the full punch available for image editing.

Anyway, there was no warranty card in the box, and nowhere on the Eizo site to register, so I gave them a call. The documentation states that the monitor has a five year warranty from the date of purchase. Only it's the date that the retailer purchases it from Eizo, not the date I purchase it from the retailer. Weird!!

Even more weird, Scan have had the monitor for the best part of a year. It surprises me that they would tie up that much cash in stock...

[Inactive]

Never come across anything like that before Rik, good job they aint had it in stock for 4 years 11 months.. 

As you say, one huge amount of dosh tied up in one item, seems a strange way to run a business, you would think they would order as requested.

[Rik]

Indeed - and they have several, across two colour variants. I'd be interested in a peek at their inventory.

[Lance]

I would like to have their inventory!

[Rik]

You and me both, Lance.

[john]

The guy sitting next to me at work recently tried to return a computer power supply to Scan (in fact he lives just round the corner from them). It stopped working the day before the warranty ran out but they were closed when he telephoned so he left a message explaining the fault. However when he telephoned them the day after, they refused to honour the warranty because they said he had failed to return it before it expired. He explained that he couldn't return it because they were closed but the guy he spoke to didn't want to know. Anyway after a quick call to trading standards, who told him what to say, and calling Scan again resulted in them agreeing to replace it.

[Rik]

That's disappointing, but I suspect it's quite a common issue these days. I did have to nudge Scan to get them to resolve the monitor problem, but it was quite a gentle nudge and they did respond promptly and in a manner designed to minimise the inconvenience to me.

[MoHux]

They had obviously taken a second look at your account Rik. 

Mo

[Rik]

You may have a point there.

[Inactive]

I will continue to monitor progress on this thread.. 

[Rik]

That's almost a groan, but not quite.

My friendly local Trading Standards department are now studying the warranty. They are unhappy with the terms as described to me, and want to see whether it's in breach of any statute. Although the warranty is in addition to my statutory rights, it apparently has to comply with aspects of the Sale of Goods Act. More as I get it.

[Glenn]

HP's business warranty is 3 years + month from the date of manufacture, but with the number of units that fly out of the warehouses, it is not a problem.

[Ray]

My friendly local Trading Standards department are now studying the warranty. They are unhappy with the terms as described to me, and want to see whether it's in breach of any statute.

As I would be Rik, I've always understood that a Warranty runs from the date of purchase!

[Rik]

That's the odd thing, Ray. The warranty states that it runs from the date of purchase. It also states that it's only available to the original purchaser. Now, if Eizo say it runs from when Scan purchased it, they are also saying, logically, that Scan are the original purchaser and, therefore, that I have no warranty. Hopefully, my friend at Trading Standards will knock some sense into them. Equally hopefully, I'll never need the warranty anyway. If it comes to it, given the price, it's a small claims case against Scan...

[john]

If you're not the original purchaser then are the goods not deeed to be secondhand and therefore not liable for VAT ?

[Rik]

I suspect only Eizo, if anyone, thinks that I'm not the original purchaser, John.

[Lance]

Indeed Scan will want to charge VAT so they can recover the VAT they paid on it in the first instance!

[john]

I was just saying that you could use the VAT argument as proof it was not really secondhand and therefore Rik was indeed the original purchaser and the warranty should start from when he purchased it 

[Rik]

Wouldn't a VAT registered trader have to charge tax even on second-hand goods, though, John?

[john]

Don't ruin a good argument with facts Rik 

[Rik]

 

Sorry... 

[Inactive]

This sounds like a case of buying a pre - reg car, the Dealers buy and register a load of cars within certain months to attract volume discounts, but...a big but, they sell them as such, the warranty is reduced accordingly dependant on the date of sale to the 2nd owner, albeit the car is effectively brand new.

The pre-reg cars are obviously much cheaper than brand new ones, perhaps a case of seeking a discount if the same applies.

[Rik]

Could be, though with a car, you would know the date of registration before purchase (or should do). It's not a question I've ever thought to ask in normal retail commerce, can you imagine going into Currys and asking when they were invoiced for something by the manufacturer?? 

[Inactive]

Agreed Rik, something I have never come across before.

I suppose it would be legally classed as " Used " or " Second Hand ", even if it isn't.

[Rik]

I suppose it would be legally classed as " Used " or " Second Hand ", even if it isn't.

That's the interesting bit. If it is classed as second-hand, it should have been declared as such. I don't blame Scan in this situation, but the Eizo attitude is weird.