Helping my brother - Returning a RRoD'ed 360

[SiD the Turtle]

in that case i think you'll find that MS offering a 3yr warrenty on all 360's due to RROD would prove that it was faulty at time of purchase?, would it not?

actually you make a very good point. You could actually take any 360's with RROD back to the retailer after the 3 yr warranty has expired as the period of time in the SOGA is just stated as being 'a reasonable time frame'. With all the publicity the RROD problem has received then it wouldn't be difficult to prove the goods were faulty at time of purchase.

That warranty is with Microsoft, not the retailer, so the contract exists between you and Microsoft, thus if you go into the shop and claim that it is under 3 year warranty they are within their right to tell you to GTFO.

Their 3 year warranty does not state that the Xbox is inherently faulty, so you won't be getting anywhere with the retailer. Your only recourse is to try saying that a reasonable person would expect the Xbox to last more than x years, but good luck with that.

 

[mcwildcard]

That warranty is with Microsoft, not the retailer, so the contract exists between you and Microsoft

Totally incorrect, the contract is of a sale between you and the retailer, Microsoft are not involved in the agreement. There will be a separate contract between Microsoft and the retailers, so if you sue the retailer, they can in turn sue Microsoft, but in terms of the law, the consumer cannot directly act against Microsoft.
It's called privity of contract.

 

[Joebob]

Stop spouting mis-information. The repair procedure is in place to get the retailers out of this situation.

How am I spouting mis information?
1, Have you heard of the Sale of Goods Act?
2, Do you understand what rights it actually gives to the consumer?

That warranty is with Microsoft, not the retailer, so the contract exists between you and Microsoft, thus if you go into the shop and claim that it is under 3 year warranty they are within their right to tell you to GTFO.

Their 3 year warranty does not state that the Xbox is inherently faulty, so you won't be getting anywhere with the retailer. Your only recourse is to try saying that a reasonable person would expect the Xbox to last more than x years, but good luck with that.

Knowing the way big retailers behave regarding issues like this I totally agree with you that they would tell me to GTFO if I went into a store after three years. That would not stop me from persuing the matter with their head office and then through the small claims court though. I don't think it would be too difficult to convince the judge that there is a very well known inherant problem with Xbox 360's and then that you would expect a £300 peice of consumer electronics equipment to last more than 3 years. I very much doubt it would get to that stage though as I'm sure they would rather just settle with a new console rather than pay for legal costs etc. Wouldn't take more than a couple of well written letters I would imagine.

 

[SiD the Turtle]

Totally incorrect, the contract is of a sale between you and the retailer, Microsoft are not involved in the agreement. There will be a separate contract between Microsoft and the retailers, so if you sue the retailer, they can in turn sue Microsoft, but in terms of the law, the consumer cannot directly act against Microsoft.
It's called privity of contract.

Nope, MS' additional warranty (for this specific issue) is between you and them, read the Ts & Cs.

 

[Joebob]

Nope, MS' additional warranty (for this specific issue) is between you and them, read the Ts & Cs.

That may be true but it doesn't effect your statatory rights. Which is the contract is between you and the retailer.

I was originally talking about once the 3 yr warranty with MS had expired btw.

 

[PiKe]

How am I spouting mis information?
1, Have you heard of the Sale of Goods Act?
2, Do you understand what rights it actually gives to the consumer?

Yes and yes.

 

[Joebob]

Yes and yes.

so care to elaborate how it was mis information then?

 

[SiD the Turtle]

That may be true but it doesn't effect your statatory rights. Which is the contract is between you and the retailer.

Yes, the contract of sale (usual stuff) is between you and the retailer, so if it breaks, go to them, not MS and proclaim your normal rights.

If it breaks and you want to get it fixed under MS' 3RROD warranty, you have to go to them.

Of course there is nothing to say that the retailer won't honour a repair/replacement themselves anyway.

 

[PiKe]

That may be true but it doesn't effect your statatory rights. Which is the contract is between you and the retailer.

How many times? You're entitled to a repair or replacement. That's what you're getting, just via Microsoft.

 

[Joebob]

How many times? You're entitled to a repair or replacement. That's what you're getting, just via Microsoft.

and once your 3 year warranty with MS has expired?

 

[PiKe]

Buy another.

 

[Memphis]

Yikes, what have I started?!

Thanks for all the advice guys, but he's not gonna push them too hard and just go through with the return to Microsoft.

Thanks again.

 

[Loosecannon]

A shop has every right to ask you to send an item for repair or to do so themselves - they do not have to give you a replacement in the meantime.

This is more the case with old ps3's and original xbox 360. They can't actually replace the item and therefore repair is the only option.

 

[mcwildcard]

Nope, MS' additional warranty (for this specific issue) is between you and them, read the Ts & Cs.

Technically, that contract is not valid for early system buyers, due to the rules of incorporation, however it's in the consumer's benefit, so nobody is ever going to challenge that. Mind you, if Microsoft were to suddenly rescind the extended warranty, then I'd be interested to find out how they'd stand legally.

 

[Joebob]

Buy another.

Well that would be your choice, but it still doesn't make my suggestion as to what I would do mis information does it. Let's leave it there shall we?

 

[PiKe]

Well that would be your choice, but it still doesn't make my suggestion as to what I would do mis information does it. Let's leave it there shall we?

No lets not because you're wrong.

Why would the DTI lie to me and say that once 6 months has elapsed the onus is down to the consumer to prove it was inherently faulty?

This would mean paying a qualified electrical technician to open the 360 (thus voiding the warranty) to confirm cold solder joints or warping of the motherboard.

Just by saying, "there's a 3 year warranty, there's the proof", isn't enough.

A retailer refusing an exchange after 6 months is perfectly legal to do so, they're offering to repair (by themselves sending it to Microsoft), so you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[Joebob]

No lets not because you're wrong.

Why would the DTI say to me that once 6 months has elapsed the onus is down to the consumer to prove it was inherently faulty? This would mean paying a qualified electrical technician to open the 360 (thus voiding the warranty) to confirm cold solder joints or warping of the motherboard.

Just by saying, "there's a 3 year warranty, there's the proof", isn't enough.

A retailer refusing an exchange after 6 months is perfectly legal to do so.

The DTI are correct it is down to the consumer to prove it was inherently faulty. However, my original point was saying that 'AFTER' the 3 year warranty is up you use the SOGA to get your 360 repaired with the retailer. And that the fact MS had extended the warranty for 3 years for a known and inherant fault would back up the argument. Nothing is cut and dry in this world but I would be fairly confident if I took it to the small claims court - in fact, like I said before, I doubt it would even get that far.

How exactly does this make me wrong just because you don't agree or would do different?

 

[monkeyspank]

Wrong.

LMAO you missed the << arrows at the start

 

[PiKe]

My original point was saying that 'AFTER' the 3 year warranty is up you use the SOGA to get your 360 repaired with the retailer. And that the fact MS had extended the warranty for 3 years for a known and inherant fault would back up the argument. Nothing is cut and dry in this world but I would be fairly confident if I took it to the small claims court.

How exactly does this make me wrong just because you don't agree or would do different?

Might be argued that 3 years of use is acceptable from something that cost £150.

Microsoft currently only charge £50 to fix your console if it's out of warranty as well. I'd imagine that if the console is going to fail from 3rrod it will have done it by now... My Oct 2005 manufactured one died in March this year.

 

[Joebob]

Might be argued that 3 years of use is acceptable from something that cost £150.

Microsoft currently only charge £50 to fix your console if it's out of warranty as well. I'd imagine that if the console is going to fail from 3rrod it will have done it by now... My Oct 2005 manufactured one died in March this year.

So it only cost you £150 3 years ago - man you got a bargain! MS could be charging 50p to fix it for all I care, it still doesn't make anything I have said mis information as you claimed I was spouting!!!