<?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: TPG breaches section 53(g) of TPA</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cspcentral.com.au/2008/12/tpg-breaches-section-53g-of-tpa/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cspcentral.com.au/2008/12/tpg-breaches-section-53g-of-tpa/</link>
	<description>Australia&#039;s ISP and Telco Legal Site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:16:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.cspcentral.com.au/2008/12/tpg-breaches-section-53g-of-tpa/#comment-128</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cspcentral.com.au/wordpress/?p=1090#comment-128</guid>
		<description>As someone who works in a phone store if the phone is out of the 12 month warranty offered by the manufacturer and they wish to try to get a free repair/replacment then we tell them no (as for argument sake we belive &quot;merchantable quality&quot; is 12 months. And direct them to contact the ombudsman is this correct or if not how should we deal with this situation? most expensive phones e.g blackberrys, palms, imate etc have a 2-3 year warranty anyway and i would think that a customer who buys a cheap phone say on a $20 plan cant expect a replacment after 12 months. If you buy rubbish then thats what you get.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As someone who works in a phone store if the phone is out of the 12 month warranty offered by the manufacturer and they wish to try to get a free repair/replacment then we tell them no (as for argument sake we belive &#8220;merchantable quality&#8221; is 12 months. And direct them to contact the ombudsman is this correct or if not how should we deal with this situation? most expensive phones e.g blackberrys, palms, imate etc have a 2-3 year warranty anyway and i would think that a customer who buys a cheap phone say on a $20 plan cant expect a replacment after 12 months. If you buy rubbish then thats what you get.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Moon</title>
		<link>http://www.cspcentral.com.au/2008/12/tpg-breaches-section-53g-of-tpa/#comment-127</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Moon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cspcentral.com.au/wordpress/?p=1090#comment-127</guid>
		<description>No, Adam.  A manufacturer is welcome to have a specific ELF (but it is not mandatory) but neither the manufacturer nor the retailer can say, or imply, that it is instead of the non-excludable, non-limitable rights granted by the Trade Practices Act.

So, if TPG had said&#039; &#039;The manufacturer offers an ELF of 14 days.  There&#039;s also a warranty of 1 year.  But they are in addition to, and not instead of, your statutory warranty that the goods supplied to you will be of merchantable quality&#039; -- no problem.

The problem with their terms is the statement that if the ELF doesn&#039;t apply, and you&#039;re gear is more than a year old, you have to pay for all repairs yourself (or claim them on insurance, if you have it.)  That is simply not a true statement under Australian law, for the reasons stated in the article.

Also note that in Australia, a consumer is not required to deal with the manufacturer over rights that are &#039;bound&#039; to the manufacturer.  If I am sold a dud phone, I am entitled to take it back to the business that sold it to me, and say &#039;Make it better.&#039;

I perfectly understand that consumers are often asked to arrange to return to a distributor or repair centre, and I&#039;m happy to do that myself if it seems like the fastest way to fix a problem.  But we can&#039;t be &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt; to go behind the retailer to get a remedy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, Adam.  A manufacturer is welcome to have a specific ELF (but it is not mandatory) but neither the manufacturer nor the retailer can say, or imply, that it is instead of the non-excludable, non-limitable rights granted by the Trade Practices Act.</p>
<p>So, if TPG had said&#8217; &#8216;The manufacturer offers an ELF of 14 days.  There&#8217;s also a warranty of 1 year.  But they are in addition to, and not instead of, your statutory warranty that the goods supplied to you will be of merchantable quality&#8217; &#8212; no problem.</p>
<p>The problem with their terms is the statement that if the ELF doesn&#8217;t apply, and you&#8217;re gear is more than a year old, you have to pay for all repairs yourself (or claim them on insurance, if you have it.)  That is simply not a true statement under Australian law, for the reasons stated in the article.</p>
<p>Also note that in Australia, a consumer is not required to deal with the manufacturer over rights that are &#8216;bound&#8217; to the manufacturer.  If I am sold a dud phone, I am entitled to take it back to the business that sold it to me, and say &#8216;Make it better.&#8217;</p>
<p>I perfectly understand that consumers are often asked to arrange to return to a distributor or repair centre, and I&#8217;m happy to do that myself if it seems like the fastest way to fix a problem.  But we can&#8217;t be <em>required</em> to go behind the retailer to get a remedy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.cspcentral.com.au/2008/12/tpg-breaches-section-53g-of-tpa/#comment-126</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cspcentral.com.au/wordpress/?p=1090#comment-126</guid>
		<description>Correct me if I am wrong... but ELFs are bound to the manufacturer not the distributor.
In some cases the ELF is 14 days (minimum) and in others it is 30 to 45 days.
For instance, Nokia&#039;s ELF period is 30 days. Sony Ericsson 30 (i think), and Motorola 15.
With the exception of Blue Ant (bluetooth accessories) which have a lifetime ELF period.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct me if I am wrong&#8230; but ELFs are bound to the manufacturer not the distributor.<br />
In some cases the ELF is 14 days (minimum) and in others it is 30 to 45 days.<br />
For instance, Nokia&#8217;s ELF period is 30 days. Sony Ericsson 30 (i think), and Motorola 15.<br />
With the exception of Blue Ant (bluetooth accessories) which have a lifetime ELF period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

