New Intel B3 Chipset! Now Being Shipped!

duncanm · 24 Feb 2011 at 15:33

fini said:
As someone with 2 law degrees who practices contract law each day I think I know my legal rights. What educates you on yours?

If something is faulty within six months then there is an inference that the goods were faulty at the point of sale. This inference can be disputed. Now assume it's not disputed because in this case that would be a ridiculously uphill struggle. In that case there are three remedies open: replacement, repair or refund. It is at the retailers preference which option they choose. That is why, in this instance, you have zero right to demand a refund.

Please ink something that backs this up, should be really easy as your an expert in this region.

Sadly every government document I've seen on the topic states that the customer is entitled to a refund. The subtext of every document is that retailers are completely responsible for any faulty equipment they deliver to customers and should do their best to minimise the inconvenience caused.

Also what's your legal opinion of them misleading their customers regarding the manufacturers arrangements for swapping out the motherboard to stop them asking for a refund?

Fortunately having a law degree isn't necessary to track down and find the documents regarding consumer law since they're made available to us so we can educate ourselves. BTW I could go down the education level willy waving competition with you since I'd technically 'win' but it's an argument on the internet and nobody wins those.

izit · 24 Feb 2011 at 15:56

Will they be in stock soon?

mmj_uk · 24 Feb 2011 at 18:26

fini said:
As someone with 2 law degrees who practices contract law each day I think I know my legal rights. What educates you on yours?

If something is faulty within six months then there is an inference that the goods were faulty at the point of sale. This inference can be disputed. Now assume it's not disputed because in this case that would be a ridiculously uphill struggle. In that case there are three remedies open: replacement, repair or refund. It is at the retailers preference which option they choose. That is why, in this instance, you have zero right to demand a refund.

Replacement and repair are not options in this case as all of them have the same inherent flaw, so that leaves the retailer one option (ok then two if they want to try to avoid their legal responsibilities).

fini said:
The point is they're not legally obliged to and, given that they'll probably lose money in doing so (as they won't be able to claim it from intel as they will have failed to mitigate their losses) any company doing that is mental. That one has chosen to is suprisibg, but should not be relied upon.

The SOG act quite clearly states that is the retailers responsibility, OCUK weren't forced at gunpoint to buy up all of the Sandy Bridge stock on release, nor were they forced to continue selling it when a flaw was found, they could quite easily have taken their stock off-line and waited to get it replaced themselves for the new revision at Intel's expense.

Montala · 24 Feb 2011 at 18:39

izit said:
Will they be in stock soon?

Intel themselves have said that they do not expect motherboards with B3 stepping to start appearing in the market place until "shortly after the second half of March", so I read that to mean in about a month's time!

It is still too early to say for sure though.

Puppetmaster · 24 Feb 2011 at 18:49

duncanm said:
Please ink something that backs this up, should be really easy as your an expert in this region.

Sadly every government document I've seen on the topic states that the customer is entitled to a refund. The subtext of every document is that retailers are completely responsible for any faulty equipment they deliver to customers and should do their best to minimise the inconvenience caused.

Also what's your legal opinion of them misleading their customers regarding the manufacturers arrangements for swapping out the motherboard to stop them asking for a refund?

Fortunately having a law degree isn't necessary to track down and find the documents regarding consumer law since they're made available to us so we can educate ourselves. BTW I could go down the education level willy waving competition with you since I'd technically 'win' but it's an argument on the internet and nobody wins those.

I find it quite funny that you claim about legal documents prooving your entitled to a refund when i quoted your own post, prooving how you are only entitled to a refund IF and WHEN the board is faulty.

modez · 24 Feb 2011 at 19:37

fini said:
As someone with 2 law degrees who practices contract law each day I think I know my legal rights. What educates you on yours?

If something is faulty within six months then there is an inference that the goods were faulty at the point of sale. This inference can be disputed. Now assume it's not disputed because in this case that would be a ridiculously uphill struggle. In that case there are three remedies open: replacement, repair or refund. It is at the retailers preference which option they choose. That is why, in this instance, you have zero right to demand a refund.

What I have heard from Trading Standards is nothing like what you have stated here on the forum. Unless you have some evidence to back up what you said.

gmaan · 24 Feb 2011 at 22:06

fini said:
As someone with 2 law degrees who practices contract law each day I think I know my legal rights. What educates you on yours?

If something is faulty within six months then there is an inference that the goods were faulty at the point of sale. This inference can be disputed. Now assume it's not disputed because in this case that would be a ridiculously uphill struggle. In that case there are three remedies open: replacement, repair or refund. It is at the retailers preference which option they choose. That is why, in this instance, you have zero right to demand a refund.

going by this http://whatconsumer.co.uk/returning-damaged-or-faulty-goods/ its sounds right inc "you have zero right to DEMAND a refund" However that doesnt mean you WONT get one but it is up the the resller to decide on there own course of action and i believe what to op is trying to say is, as all brands are stating there intentions of replacement you may well find that certain retailers will want to excercise there right of replacing your faulty goods.

i have spoken to my place of purchase and they have given me the option of a refund of replacment others may not. It should be noted that it should not cost you anything to get the item replaced or repaired.

Glen

lolwithtim · 24 Feb 2011 at 22:43

Good to hear that the b3 chipset is just about ready. Lets just hope something like this won't happe again.

mmj_uk · 25 Feb 2011 at 00:46

gmaan said:
as all brands are stating there intentions of replacement you may well find that certain retailers will want to excercise there right of replacing your faulty goods.

Retailers don't have anything to replace them with, the SOG act clearly states that the responsibility lies with the retailer and not the manufacturer, so they can't just fob you off with "the manufacturer will replace it for you in 1-2mths time", the boards were all inherently faulty at the time of sale so it's quite shoddy after-sales support to be refusing refunds to be honest.

nightmare99 · 25 Feb 2011 at 09:00

the boards were all inherently faulty at the time of sale so it's quite shoddy after-sales support to be refusing refunds to be honest.

They are not all faulty, they MAY develop a fault this is a key difference. Intel did not have to admit that a % of chipsets will develop a fault over time and could have just replaced boards as and when they failed on people (rather than choosing to replace all of them pro-activly).

If you are dead set on a refund best bet is to raise an RMA saying you are having SATA problems.

Shetlander · 25 Feb 2011 at 09:26

I still cant believe people still think there not all faulty. The fault is exacerbated by using the affected ports. The more they are used, the higher the chance of them failing quicker. If you dont use them, that doesnt mean they are not faulty.

Any way, Im happy with my refund for my Asus P8P67 Pro from OCUK.

Frank_Rizzo · 25 Feb 2011 at 10:13

They are faulty. There is a flaw in the design such that x% will fail within weeks, y% months, z% years.

"As part of ongoing quality assurance, Intel Corporation has discovered a design issue in a recently released support chip, the Intel® 6 Series, code-named Cougar Point, and has implemented a silicon fix"

It could be the case that some users boards will never fail. But that doesn't mean the boards do not have a fault - they do whether they exhibit symptoms of the fault or not.

Similar with product recalls on food items, such as when a piece of metal falls off a machine in the peanut butter factory. The manufacturer has to recall all jars of peanut butter for that particular revision whether your jar has a bolt in it or not.

Yoga · 25 Feb 2011 at 10:43

fini said:
As someone with 2 law degrees who practices contract law each day I think I know my legal rights. What educates you on yours?

If something is faulty within six months then there is an inference that the goods were faulty at the point of sale. This inference can be disputed. Now assume it's not disputed because in this case that would be a ridiculously uphill struggle. In that case there are three remedies open: replacement, repair or refund. It is at the retailers preference which option they choose. That is why, in this instance, you have zero right to demand a refund.

The P67 chipset has been officially stated as faulty, and hence, sold faulty at the point of sale.

By your own definition, one has every right to request a refund. There is nothing to dispute.

nightmare99 · 25 Feb 2011 at 11:43

They are faulty. There is a flaw in the design such that x% will fail within weeks, y% months, z% years.

Just because a product may fail does not mean it is faulty.

Hard drives have a 2% failure rate this does not make them all faulty :confused:

redrooster303 · 25 Feb 2011 at 11:57

There is a law stating that a product has to be fit for the purpose it was intended for and this fault would make it not fit for purpose if it will fail over time if used. Theres also no way of telling which are faulty is there, the tool everyone is using just tells you if your board has p67 sata 2 ports on it or has drives plugged into them for people who know no better. Anyway I'm gonna stick to my guns and get a refund and then add some cash for a z68 board.

Puppetmaster · 25 Feb 2011 at 12:52

redrooster303 said:
There is a law stating that a product has to be fit for the purpose it was intended for and this fault would make it not fit for purpose if it will fail over time if used. Theres also no way of telling which are faulty is there, the tool everyone is using just tells you if your board has p67 sata 2 ports on it or has drives plugged into them for people who know no better. Anyway I'm gonna stick to my guns and get a refund and then add some cash for a z68 board.

Has your board currently developed the fault? If not then i doubt it will be easy getting a refund. If your board doesn't develop a fault, its fit for purpose in my eyes.

stulid · 25 Feb 2011 at 12:57

MSI in other countries are now doing swaps with free prizes if you register.

http://event.msi.com/mb/2011/bravo_event/sea/index.html

and their swap flow,

http://event.msi.com/mb/2011/replace_event/sea/swap/Philippines.html

Just need the same in the E.U

Shetlander · 25 Feb 2011 at 13:19

Puppetmaster said:
Has your board currently developed the fault? If not then i doubt it will be easy getting a refund. If your board doesn't develop a fault, its fit for purpose in my eyes.

So I take it you wont be swapping yours then.

redrooster303 · 25 Feb 2011 at 13:26

So why didn't intel just wait to see who's developed faults then instead of spending a billion pound/dollars making new chipsets for everyone if they were fit for purpose.

Link: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4154/asus-msi-announce-6series-motherboard-replacement-programs

Says in that link that if you want a refund Asus has said that it will be handled by where you bought it from. Why would they say this if it weren't the case???

JBod · 25 Feb 2011 at 13:35

nightmare99 said:
Just because a product may fail does not mean it is faulty.

Hard drives have a 2% failure rate this does not make them all faulty

Every single one is faulty, it is a "Design Fault" as confirmed and announced by Intel themselves. Their %age failure rate is simply "back of a fag packet" statistics based on how many people will be use the faulty SATA ports and computer uptime.

The facts are quite simple. If you use the Intel SATA2 ports on a Sandybridge motherboard it WILL fail on you. Ergo it was sold faulty (through no fault of the retailer) and not fit for purpose.