<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sale of Goods Act</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/</link>
	<description>Clear and Practical Consumer Advice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:27:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-3435</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-3435</guid>
		<description>I have a ps3 (fat), it is over 4 yrs old, in June of 2008 it broke down( the disc drive) it was replaced free of charge  with one of equal quality ie : size of hardrive and age but not my own ( which i assume was fixed and given to someone as a replacement ).Now it has broken down again only this time it won&#039;t turn on.Further research has revealed that i am not the only one to suffer this  fault called ylod( yellow light of death) when a soldering joint melts and dislodges the motherboard.
Sony wish to charge me £131.oo to fix this problem for, again a replacement model of equal type ( not my own fixed and sent back to me).
Surely because of the world wide failure of this type  ,it&#039;s a design fault and not of my making, and sony , like the first time should fix it free of charge or replace it free of charge.
       many thanks,
            joe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a ps3 (fat), it is over 4 yrs old, in June of 2008 it broke down( the disc drive) it was replaced free of charge  with one of equal quality ie : size of hardrive and age but not my own ( which i assume was fixed and given to someone as a replacement ).Now it has broken down again only this time it won&#8217;t turn on.Further research has revealed that i am not the only one to suffer this  fault called ylod( yellow light of death) when a soldering joint melts and dislodges the motherboard.<br />
Sony wish to charge me £131.oo to fix this problem for, again a replacement model of equal type ( not my own fixed and sent back to me).<br />
Surely because of the world wide failure of this type  ,it&#8217;s a design fault and not of my making, and sony , like the first time should fix it free of charge or replace it free of charge.<br />
       many thanks,<br />
            joe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catriona</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1916</link>
		<dc:creator>Catriona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:25:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1916</guid>
		<description>Steph, just because companies interpret the law in their own way doesn&#039;t mean it is correct. Therefore who is to say that less than 3 stuck pixels does not constitute unfitness for purpose? If it is hampering your use and enjoyment of the item, this is grounds enough. PC World only have to offer a repair in the first instance, not a brand new one. If they make it difficult for you ask to see them manager quoting S 48 Sale of Goods. if this yields nothing, threaten to take the matter to Trading Standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steph, just because companies interpret the law in their own way doesn&#8217;t mean it is correct. Therefore who is to say that less than 3 stuck pixels does not constitute unfitness for purpose? If it is hampering your use and enjoyment of the item, this is grounds enough. PC World only have to offer a repair in the first instance, not a brand new one. If they make it difficult for you ask to see them manager quoting S 48 Sale of Goods. if this yields nothing, threaten to take the matter to Trading Standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steph</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1903</link>
		<dc:creator>Steph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1903</guid>
		<description>I have just bought an Apple Macbook from PC World and I have discovered it has a stuck pixel in the screen. This is a small, bright blue spot in the centre of the screen. Now, it is small but because it is in the centre of the screen it is very noticeable when I am watching films or typing on the laptop and it bothers me a lot. I paid £720 for this laptop and the reason I bought it was because I thought Apple was a quality company for making laptops. I am going to try and take it back to PC World on Sunday but I know they are going to give me a hard time about returning a laptop for one stuck pixel as many companies have a policy that they won&#039;t accept returns of laptops for less than three stuck pixels. What I want to know is - does this stuck pixel count as a minor defect under the sales of goods Act? And if so, how can I enforce this right in PC World? I want them to give me a new Apple Macbook that has a perfect screen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have just bought an Apple Macbook from PC World and I have discovered it has a stuck pixel in the screen. This is a small, bright blue spot in the centre of the screen. Now, it is small but because it is in the centre of the screen it is very noticeable when I am watching films or typing on the laptop and it bothers me a lot. I paid £720 for this laptop and the reason I bought it was because I thought Apple was a quality company for making laptops. I am going to try and take it back to PC World on Sunday but I know they are going to give me a hard time about returning a laptop for one stuck pixel as many companies have a policy that they won&#8217;t accept returns of laptops for less than three stuck pixels. What I want to know is &#8211; does this stuck pixel count as a minor defect under the sales of goods Act? And if so, how can I enforce this right in PC World? I want them to give me a new Apple Macbook that has a perfect screen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catriona</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1882</link>
		<dc:creator>Catriona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1882</guid>
		<description>Nicola, Regardless of why the TV is breaking down, Sale of Goods makes reference to durability which gives you the right to expect items to last for a reasonable amount of time. Less than 2 years isn&#039;t reasonable and you can rely on this. Give them 14 days to provide you with a repair or a replacement (at no expense to you) or you will recoup your costs via the small claims court.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicola, Regardless of why the TV is breaking down, Sale of Goods makes reference to durability which gives you the right to expect items to last for a reasonable amount of time. Less than 2 years isn&#8217;t reasonable and you can rely on this. Give them 14 days to provide you with a repair or a replacement (at no expense to you) or you will recoup your costs via the small claims court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicola</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1846</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicola</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:35:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1846</guid>
		<description>I wrote back in March regarding our Samsung LCD television that stopped working after 20 months.  We are still trying to claim back the cost of repair and are now in contact with the Retailer.  They have asked for a diagnostic report from the repairer in order to consider the claim.  We have now received this from the repairer who has said that the fault was &#039;probably down to wear and tear&#039;.  Should this make any difference to the claim?  Surely a television shouldn&#039;t stop working after this amount of time even if it was in constant use (which it wasn&#039;t)?!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wrote back in March regarding our Samsung LCD television that stopped working after 20 months.  We are still trying to claim back the cost of repair and are now in contact with the Retailer.  They have asked for a diagnostic report from the repairer in order to consider the claim.  We have now received this from the repairer who has said that the fault was &#8216;probably down to wear and tear&#8217;.  Should this make any difference to the claim?  Surely a television shouldn&#8217;t stop working after this amount of time even if it was in constant use (which it wasn&#8217;t)?!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catriona</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1808</link>
		<dc:creator>Catriona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1808</guid>
		<description>Jonathan, Sale of Goods states that the seller won&#039;t be liable for any faults which a pre-purchase inspection ought to have revealed. If these are faults which were obvious from a cursory examination of the car or a brief test drive then you probably won&#039;t have much come-back. However if they could not have been noted from the opportunity you were given to inspect then you can claim poor quality (taking into account the recognition that it is second-hand). You could also claim elements of the car were not as described - as stated in the advert. This is another of your statutory rights. If the dealer is unwilling to deal with you, threaten to take the matter to the small claims court to recover the money you paid. Be advised however that the max you can claim through the county court will only be £5000.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan, Sale of Goods states that the seller won&#8217;t be liable for any faults which a pre-purchase inspection ought to have revealed. If these are faults which were obvious from a cursory examination of the car or a brief test drive then you probably won&#8217;t have much come-back. However if they could not have been noted from the opportunity you were given to inspect then you can claim poor quality (taking into account the recognition that it is second-hand). You could also claim elements of the car were not as described &#8211; as stated in the advert. This is another of your statutory rights. If the dealer is unwilling to deal with you, threaten to take the matter to the small claims court to recover the money you paid. Be advised however that the max you can claim through the county court will only be £5000.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Marsh</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1807</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Marsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 06:39:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1807</guid>
		<description>Catriona

The terms and conditions state that &quot;The purchaser accepts that they have been given all oppertunities to inspect the vehicle to their complete satisfaction and have been given the oppertunity to have the vehicle inspected by a third party of their choice&quot;. Will this affect my claim under the SOGA. We have also found out the air bags have been removed. The advert stated Drivers air bag and air conditioning both of which do not work. We bought it from a dealer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Catriona</p>
<p>The terms and conditions state that &#8220;The purchaser accepts that they have been given all oppertunities to inspect the vehicle to their complete satisfaction and have been given the oppertunity to have the vehicle inspected by a third party of their choice&#8221;. Will this affect my claim under the SOGA. We have also found out the air bags have been removed. The advert stated Drivers air bag and air conditioning both of which do not work. We bought it from a dealer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catriona</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1806</link>
		<dc:creator>Catriona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 21:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1806</guid>
		<description>Jonathan, yes, absolutely, as long as you bought it from a dealer and not as a private sale. See: 
http://whatconsumer.co.uk/buying-a-car/ for more on second hand cars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan, yes, absolutely, as long as you bought it from a dealer and not as a private sale. See:<br />
<a href="http://whatconsumer.co.uk/buying-a-car/" rel="nofollow">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/buying-a-car/</a> for more on second hand cars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catriona</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1805</link>
		<dc:creator>Catriona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 21:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1805</guid>
		<description>Roy, any firm or individual who is acting &#039;in the course of a business&#039; has an obligation to provide you with an item which if of good quality, fit for purpose and durable. A charity shop is a commercial trader and must therefore fulfil your normal statutory rights. Having said this there is the recognition that second hand items will not perform perfectly, and if you were to take it to court, this would be taken into account. If the item generally fulfils its purpose you would probably not have a case, and would be advised to ask for a reduction on the purchase price. It depends which features are not working, how it was sold and how much you paid for it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roy, any firm or individual who is acting &#8216;in the course of a business&#8217; has an obligation to provide you with an item which if of good quality, fit for purpose and durable. A charity shop is a commercial trader and must therefore fulfil your normal statutory rights. Having said this there is the recognition that second hand items will not perform perfectly, and if you were to take it to court, this would be taken into account. If the item generally fulfils its purpose you would probably not have a case, and would be advised to ask for a reduction on the purchase price. It depends which features are not working, how it was sold and how much you paid for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy</title>
		<link>http://whatconsumer.co.uk/the-sale-of-goods-act/#comment-1803</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whatconsumer.co.uk/?p=105#comment-1803</guid>
		<description>I recently purchased a telephone/fax/answering machine from a charity shop and found that certain functions do not work.  Obviously I bought it in good faith expecting to be able to use all features.  They have refused to refund my money.  How do I stand under the Sale of Goods Act?  As a charity, are they treated any differently to a normal retailer of goods?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently purchased a telephone/fax/answering machine from a charity shop and found that certain functions do not work.  Obviously I bought it in good faith expecting to be able to use all features.  They have refused to refund my money.  How do I stand under the Sale of Goods Act?  As a charity, are they treated any differently to a normal retailer of goods?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
