Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

    Originally posted by 17363D3D3A20530 link=1296845379/29#29 date=1296904973
    "informed, capable, aware of the law, and fair-minded, has some foresight, plans his or her acts, and is able to get along with others."
    That could describe me but not everyone that knows me would consider me reasonable (at all times).

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

      Some Random thoughts:

      Storm in a Tea Cup.

      There is no doubt that Black and White Warranty is best.

      My solicitor (commercial law) once told me words to the effect that the more you try and make a statement of guarantee watertight" by adding specifics, exclusions etc etc etc, the harder you make it because you then have to keep adding specifics to cover each of the specifics you already added in. KISS therefore applies, or matters become more and more complicated.

      In any case in my experience when there is a problem, it never ever gets to that Statement (or for that matter any further) because as a professional, reasonable, honest trader, you make decisions based on much much more than what you might be able get away with by sticking to the letter of the guarantee.....and you sort it out applying your own in house policies & personal judgment. By sort out, I mean a situation where the client is satisfied.

      From a traders point of view in this industry, the idea of clients coming up with their own idea of whether something is "reasonable" is interesting.

      The idea of traders being able to claim back from a manufacturer is also interesting.

      Nothing gets an honest traders heckles up quicker than someone having a lend.....and if someones having a lend I doubt such a thing as a statutory warranty is going to help much.

      It would appear honest traders selling quality goods dont have much to fear.

      Storm in a tea cup and life will as usual, go on.

      Regardz,
      Attilio
      very first CS site sponsor

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

        Originally posted by 6B4A4141465C2F0 link=1296845379/24#24 date=1296898154
        If "x" becomes faulty within 12 months of purchase, it will be repaired at no cost to the purchaser.  If "x" cannot be repaired, it will be replaced.

        Please tell me how thats not a properly written warranty.  It took me two minutes to write.  It is of course a very simple warranty though I suggest the new laws create many grey areas as they fail to be clear.
        Scenario:
        You buy X from me. I ship X and when you receive it, it doesnt work. As it never became faulty, you have no recourse.

        You buy X from me, it arrives at your door 3 weeks later. a further 48 weeks after that a fault develops. This is outside the warranty period as the clock started when it left the factory, or my place, or...

        You buy X from me, it develops a fault during warranty period and you return it to me (at whose cost?), 12 weeks later it is still not fixed and you are getting impatient...

        You buy X from me (being an espresso machine), I ship you a house brick with espresso machine stamped on the side....

        Lots of examples why your waranty would not work.

        Originally posted by 685D4E474E42642F0 link=1296845379/26#26 date=1296898853
        While I imagine there is a legal definition for reasonableness, and I understand there is a probably a huge gulf between legal contracts and what I would term a Service level Agreement.
        I used to write, or assist in writing, SLAs which are legal contracts, but with a markedly different purpose. You do, however, get a good appreciation for how difficult it is to define exactly what you want to achieve.

        Originally posted by 695D4A5C47706C4049494A4A2F0 link=1296845379/31#31 date=1296946792
        My solicitor (commercial law) once told me words to the effect that the more you try and make a statement of guarantee watertight" by adding specifics, exclusions etc etc etc, the harder you make it because you then have to keep adding specifics to cover each of the specifics you write in. KISS therefore applies.
        Originally posted by 695D4A5C47706C4049494A4A2F0 link=1296845379/31#31 date=1296946792
        Storm in a tea cup and life will as usual, go on.
        Stop being so reasonable Attilio



        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

          Originally posted by 76425543586F735F56565555300 link=1296845379/31#31 date=1296946792
          So repeating.
          traders faced with clients trying it on (whether having a legitimate claim under guarantee or not), will in most cases sort it out satisfactorily for bth parties according to their own in house policies, personal judgment and fair play.
          Storm in a tea cup and life will as usual, go on.
          Almost never the case in my experience, businesses usually try very hard to restrict consumers to the basic 12 month warranty they offer with goods, they almost always refused to honor their legal obligations to a statutory warranty under the various Trade Practices Acts until and unless the consumer pursued the case thru the small claims tribunal.

          Conversely frivolous or fraudulent claims were usually unsuccessful as you point out and I am sure the ACCC officers will make sure that is the case with the new unified legislation.

          I would also make the point that people expecting the law to provide black and white direction are seriously lacking an understanding of how Western Law works within our society. The "reasonable man" test is a common test in our legal system and is a clearly understood legal term - although it may cause some confusion amongst lay people.

          Originally posted by 52514242555C300 link=1296845379/21#21 date=1296893456
          I understand that it is good for consumers and in an ideal world good for a supplier, but I know that I dont have that kind of pull with the importer of the products I sell to be able to tell them that they will now have to pay for my time on warranty repair jobs and freight.
          I guess this largely has nothing to do with the consumer protection laws - new or old. It is more a problem of importing goods from overseas and poor business practices by the offshore manufacturers in refusing to properly warranty their products to include labour costs.

          Take the example of an Australian based manufacturer, they would have had to cover the cost of parts and labour for any warranty repair by the retailer under the old law as well as the new.

          As an Apple Computer Reseller, I get paid by Apple for all parts and labour involved in a warranty repair, I wouldnt sell a product where the manufacturer expected me to cover the labour costs to repair a product of theirs that had a manufacturing defect or fault.

          Originally posted by 74555E5E5943300 link=1296845379/22#22 date=1296893495
          And you would do well to understand that now, there is plenty of grey area within a 12 month warranty.
          Perhaps you could help me understand what you think has changed to create grey area within a 12 month warranty? Its pretty clearcut to me that as always consumers are covered for defects or faults and failure to perform as described etc. - the only significant difference I can see is that business must make consumers aware that this is not the limit of their coverage under the law.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

            More random thoughts.


            Galumay wrote:
            ".............businesses usually try very hard to restrict consumers to the basic 12 month warranty they offer with goods, they almost always refused to honor their legal obligations to a statutory warranty under the various Trade Practices Acts until and unless the consumer pursued the case thru the small claims tribunal....."


            Simple Common Sense: There has to be some kind of defined cut off point where something lapses, whether it be a period of guarantee or anything else in life.

            Nevertheless...I am glad this doesnt much trouble honest traders such as CosmoreX Coffee where if a client has a concern, we look at it on individual basis and as already stated...sort it to out to the satisfaction of both parties.

            Readers should note however....If a manufacturer guarantees their equipment to be free of defective manufacture and assembly for a period of say X, and they manufacture their equipment using components sourced from another manufacturer, and they are all overseas anyway, does anyone seriously think that our small businesses can make claims against the manufacturer after their stated period of guarantee has lapsed, or that they will be able (or bother) to claim in turn from their supplier of components???????????

            All a retail trader can do is pass something back the line as far as it can which usually means the importer. Importers are not at the retail coal face and not "emotionally involved" with the retail client. If they decide something is not warrantable or is outside the designated period, this leaves the retailer to be the meat in the sandwich.

            And of course, the importer in this country is deemed to carry the responsibility of the manufacturer and that is effectively where the buck stops here.

            You can have a situation where the manufacturer supports his retailer to support the client OR, where the retailer goes it alone without support from the importer.  Neither will get much help from O/S.

            It is interesting, that sometimes it is the most unbelievably aggressive & difficult purchasers who have wrestled the very lowest price possible for themsleves, who are also be the most likely to hotly pursue a future service difficulty as being "warrantable", some time after the designated period of guarantee lapsed.  

            Clients cant have it both ways, and wholesale and retail prices must be at a level high enough to accommodate all of this stuff both from an importer point of view, and also from the retailer point of view.

            And of course from a service industry point of view, it doesnt matter what the cause of a problem actually is (or that it hasnt even been diagnosed yet), but the clients always seem to preface the discusssion of why they are bringing their coffee machine in, with the announcement there is a problem that should be sorted for them "under guarantee".


            Somewhere in all of that, there lies a happy medium.


            Regardz,
            A.  

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

              Originally posted by 27212C352D2139400 link=1296845379/33#33 date=1296948771
              The "reasonable man" test is a common test in our legal system and is a clearly understood legal term - although it may cause some confusion amongst lay people.
              This is the problem with most laws and an opportunity to get it right with this one has been lost.

              Originally posted by 27212C352D2139400 link=1296845379/33#33 date=1296948771
              Perhaps you could help me understand what you think has changed to create grey area within a 12 month warranty?
              Simply that every part of the interaction between consumer and trader during the sale is part and parcel of the warranty. Memories of what occured and may have been stated are likely to differ in the event of a dispute.

              Anyway, the reality is that nothing at all is going to change in my neck of the woods.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                Originally posted by 033720362D1A062A23232020450 link=1296845379/34#34 date=1296950231
                All a retail trader can do is pass something back the line as far as it can which usually means the importer. Importers are not at the retail coal face and not "emotionally involved" with the retail client. If they decide something is not warrantable or is outside the designated period, this leaves the retailer to be the meat in the sandwich.
                This situation is where the old Statutory Warranty also protected the retailer.
                In this situation the Importer is the "Seller" and the Retailer is the "Buyer" and the same law applies as does in the Retailer/Consumer transaction.

                If the new law is standardising all the state laws into one then should it not still apply?

                In other words, each buyer and seller are treated respectively as such no matter where they are in the chain.


                P.S.

                Originally posted by 043027312A1D012D24242727420 link=1296845379/31#31 date=1296946792
                It would appear honest traders selling quality goods dont have much to fear.
                I dont think they ever did.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                  Originally posted by 1C203D262C2D3A2F272C480 link=1296845379/36#36 date=1296998864
                  This situation is where the old Statutory Warranty also protected the retailer....
                  In this situation the Importer is the "Seller" and the Retailer is the "Buyer" and the same law applies as does in the Retailer/Consumer transaction............In other words, each buyer and seller are treated respectively as such no matter where they are in the chain..........
                  Hello T. There is only one teensy problem with that bit of information.......no one give a rats about traders....its really only about protecting the end consumer.

                  Never the less, as Dennis so eloquently put it, "...the reality is that nothing at all is going to change in my neck of the woods..."

                  Regardz,
                  A.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                    Originally posted by 7B4F584E55627E525B5B58583D0 link=1296845379/37#37 date=1297058183
                    Hello T. There is only one teensy problem with that bit of information.......no one give a rats about traders....its really only about protecting the end consumer.

                    I dont see anything in the legislation aimed at protecting the END consumer. Every transaction is between a supplier and a consumer.
                    Most of the traders on this forum are intermediaries. In all transactions they are either consumer or supplier and the law gives them the same protections and obligations as anybody else.

                    One reason protections are stronger for consumers is they are usually in the weaker position.

                    Originally posted by 7B4F584E55627E525B5B58583D0 link=1296845379/34#34 date=1296950231
                    All a retail trader can do is pass something back the line as far as it can which usually means the importer. Importers are not at the retail coal face and not "emotionally involved" with the retail client. If they decide something is not warrantable or is outside the designated period, this leaves the retailer to be the meat in the sandwich.
                    Here you seem to be suggesting that the retail trader (consumer) is in a weaker position than the importer (supplier). Perhaps the new consumer law will be a help to you here and prevent you becoming the meat in the sandwich?

                    Also, noted before:
                    Originally posted by 79585353544E3D0 link=1296845379/35#35 date=1296960981
                    Simply that every part of the interaction between consumer and trader during the sale is part and parcel of the warranty.  Memories of what occured and may have been stated are likely to differ in the event of a dispute.
                    The terms of trade and details of transactions between retail traders and their suppliers tend to be better standardised and documented than those between end customers and their suppliers. This means it will be easier to resolve disputes further back in the chain.

                    I have very limited sympathy for traders that complain about how hard it is to do business if they dont take the time to understand their rights and responsibilities. It is part and parcel of running a business and none of us are forced to do it. In Australia at least, there are plenty of opportunities to work for someone else and leave these headaches behind.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                      Originally posted by 26120513083F230F06060505600 link=1296845379/37#37 date=1297058183
                      Hello T. There is only one teensy problem with that bit of information.......no one give a rats about traders....its really only about protecting the end consumer.
                      A. I care!

                      I used that bit of information previously when traders tried it on and told me I had to deal direct with the manufacturer.
                      I pointed out that legally I had to deal with them and that they had their own purchase transaction to deal with.

                      Originally posted by 050D030B0913130F030B600 link=1296845379/38#38 date=1297112261
                      I dont see anything in the legislation aimed at protecting the END consumer. Every transaction is between a supplier and a consumer.
                      Most of the traders on this forum are intermediaries. In all transactions they are either consumer or supplier and the law gives them the same protections and obligations as anybody else.
                      I think this says it quite well.

                      And remember, Ive never had a problem with a site sponsor, its bad traders I gun for.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                        Originally posted by 39313F37352F2F333F375C0 link=1296845379/38#38 date=1297112261
                        The terms of trade and details of transactions between retail traders and their suppliers tend to be better standardised and documented than those between end customers and their suppliers. This means it willbe easier to resolve disputes further back in the chain.
                        Yes, and Im taking a guess here that you are not employed in any part of this chain, otherwise you would know that real life generally does not reflect or rely on a standardised document.

                        Originally posted by 39313F37352F2F333F375C0 link=1296845379/38#38 date=1297112261
                        I have very limited sympathy for traders that complain about how hard it is to do business if they dont take the time to understand their rights and responsibilities.
                        Where did I do that? I have very limited patience with people who distort my position.

                        Am off now to make my next million.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                          Re:

                          "...real life generally does not reflect or rely on a standardised document..."

                          And once again Dennis, well put.

                          "...off to make my next million..." Geeze mate you will be able to afford to buy a car shortly!


                          And thank you TG for this "...Ive never had a problem with a site sponsor, its bad traders I gun for..."
                           

                          Regardz,
                          Attilio

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                            Originally posted by 5F7E757572681B0 link=1296845379/40#40 date=1297121850
                            Yes, and Im taking a guess here that you are not employed in any part of this chain, otherwise you would know that real life generally does not reflect or rely on a standardised document.

                            Originally posted by 39313F37352F2F333F375C0 link=1296845379/38#38 date=1297112261
                            I have very limited sympathy for traders that complain about how hard it is to do business if they dont take the time to understand their rights and responsibilities.
                            Where did I do that?  I have very limited patience with people who distort my position.
                            That paragraph was not intended to refer to the quote from you, I should have spaced it further apart as I can see now that it does read like that, apologies for the misunderstanding.
                            I intended it in general terms relating to the thread as a whole -  there does seem to be a tendency for some contributors to paint traders as victims rather than see opportunities.

                            FYI, my business is not in the coffee industry, but I do run my own company. Primarily services, but with some retail on the side. All my current suppliers and customers are Australian, but that may change - hence my interest in the Vienna Sales Convention earlier.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                              One thing Im curious about and havent been able to spot on my scanning of the new laws. Online auction transactions are now included, but international transactions arent. If I buy a product from an Australian fleabay user, but it ships ffrom outside australia, am I covered by the new law?
                              Im guessing that it will depend on whether I get an Australian tax invoice or not, but does anyone know?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Australian Consumer Law - NEW!

                                Originally posted by 59515F57554F4F535F573C0 link=1296845379/42#42 date=1297139468
                                apologies for the misunderstanding.
                                Thanks for that.

                                Originally posted by 59515F57554F4F535F573C0 link=1296845379/43#43 date=1297141041
                                One thing Im curious about and havent ben able to spot on my scanning of the new laws. Online auction transactions are now included, but international transactions arent. If I buy a product from an Australian fleabay user, but it ships ffrom outside australia, am I covered by the new law?
                                Im guessing that it will depend on whether I get an Australian tax invoice or not, but does anyone know?
                                I have no idea, but would apply the same philosophy Ive always had in regard to purchases on fleabay.

                                1) If the goods arrive, I am relieved
                                2) If they are as described, I am delighted
                                3) If I have any expectation at all that I have any practical recourse in the event of a warranty claim, I know I am dreaming

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X