As far as I understand the legal definition of ‘reasonable’ is along the lines of how long an average person in an average situation would expect it to last. I suspect those in damp, poorly insulated homes with old wiring usually just get a free ride... if Dell cared enough to research the particulars of a case then yes those factors would count against you because it isn’t reasonable to expect electrical equipment to last as long in that situation. But in the general case no suppliers have time to do this so it pretty much always comes down to the general case of reasonableness instead. I’m also pretty sure if the supplier wants to assert that general reasonableness doesn’t apply then they need to make the case as to why not (eg pointing out the state of your house, or that you live in a known electrical black spot, or whatever).
As for the consumer org appliance list, it certainly isn’t binding on anybody but it is still pretty compelling if you are talking to a supplier and trying to persuade them that it isn’t worth arguing about. After all reasonable is based on what the standard consumer would expect which is exactly what the consumer list is also trying to put into numbers. Cheers, David. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jolyon Smith Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2012 11:25 a.m. To: NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List Subject: Re: [DUG] [Off Topic]Warranty expired I'm not sure that the Consumer Org appliance list is in any way binding on anybody. The law - in the form of the Consumer Guarantees Act - doesn't place numerical limits on anything as far as I know - the key word is "reasonable" which crops up everywhere. The reasonable expected life of a TV in a dry, well insulated home on a modern, surge protected circuit that is used 1-2 hours each day with brightness turned down will be well below the reasonable expected life of a TV used 4-5 hours daily on max brightness in a damp, poorly insulated home with old wiring subject to surges and spikes. I think if a consumer is to assert their rights under the act then it is up to that consumer to establish that their expectations are reasonable, and one of the factors will be the conditions under which they were using the product (or equally storing it when not in use). That too would seem "reasonable", to me. If Leigh's monitor were 12-18 months old, I'd say it was a slam dunk and Dell wouldn't/shouldn't/couldn't argue the toss. But at 4 years old I think it's far less clear cut, that's all. :)
_______________________________________________ NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list Post: [email protected] Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi Unsubscribe: send an email to [email protected] with Subject: unsubscribe
