Thread: Warranty and Australian Consumer Law

Hi Laurie, and while the new Consumer Laws may sound great, they have a major drawback.


The laws may be there, but to be useful, you still have to forkout big dollars to get them to work for you.


I know this from first hand experience, and companies like LRA are only too aware of them as well and use this cost factor to their advantage.


My 2007 L322 was literally falling apart on the production line and the LR warranty is not worth the paper it was printed on.


At the very first service, I was told by LRA, that the issues I had with my vehicle were caused by ware and tare and as such, not covered by the warranty.


The issues were caused by faulty designed and manufactured parts not by ware and tare but it was going to cost me more than the RR was worth, to try to get LRA to honour their warranty and they knew it.

A it would turn out, they had sold me a brand new but unroadworthy vehicle and there was not a thing I could do about it with out spending more than the vehicle was worth.


There is a lot more to it but just be careful of how useful these consumer laws really are!

Your solicitor should have ignored any offered or implied warranty and proceeded under "The Sale of Goods Act" the goods not being fit for purpose and not of merchantable quality.

A solicitor worthy of his fees would know this. I first came across it when I had a used car yard and a disgruntled customer commenced proceedings under "The Motor Dealers Act". My solicitor told me I was lucky he went that way and not under "Sale of Goods" as the MDA was then a toothless tiger and I might get a mild penalty, a slap on the wrist, and told not to do that again. The Sale of Goods Act could have taken me to the cleaners.

That has been in place since the new consumer law came out around 2012.

The problem for the individual is to get it enforced - like the ACCC has to, you need to take the car company to court and most do not have the resources to do it. Even the ACCC has trouble though they did get a win against Ford recently.

Garry

Yep, the new laws effectiveness is based on the depths of you pocket.

The deeper your pocket, the better your chances are of getting justice.

" The deeper your pocket, the better your chances are of getting justice. "

That's pretty much what Geoffrey Robertson QC said in one of his early books about how Commonwealth Laws worked for the average person....

I had an issue with $7k the govt wanted out of me. Sought legal advice, advice was...a good case and a chance of winning. But it would cost me $20k to fight it, govt would throw everything at it so as not to set a precedent. If I lost I would be up for my costs, and theirs. If I won, I wouldn't recoup all of my costs.

I paid the $7k. A chance at justice denied.

I agree with the above posts!
Especially following Drivesafe's woes over the years; I also remember a Td6 that would just completely shut-down without warning, that nearly got its owner killed, no warranty, no justice. Personally I also ended paying a wrongful fine, as you couldn't ring or visit the reverent authority to discuss the matter, just ignored common sense and sent court papers

Speaking to a friend in the motor trade; the ACCC Ford decision has been a watershed moment in the new car industry, he said that most importers had been caught off guard with the decision, the fine, and the process Ford has to follow to avoid a repeat violation of the Act. Under this decision Ford has to fix, buy back or replace. 10,500 cars, consumer law training for staff and establish a warranty and complaints charter, plus pay the $10m fine, so the total cost will be many $ millions more. Nearly all the importers have/are reviewing their warranty procedures as the successful prosecution of Ford has set a legal precedence in Australian Motor Vehicle Consumer Law.
How it goes from here will be interesting, but now all the importers are on notice.

Laurie

Instead of selling my RR, maybe it’s time to have another chat with my solicitor and see what the Ford ruling means?