Printable View
No quite true - the same basic rules existed under the previous legislation in the Trade Practices Act but the way it was written made aspects hard to enforce - hence the new 2011 legislation which covered all the old legislation and added some other aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by discotwinturbo
Garry
"The ACL commences from 1 January 2011. Transactions for goods and services made before then will continue to be covered by previous consumer laws. For example, goods sold on 24 December 2010 will be covered by the implied conditions and warranties of existing consumer laws, not the new consumer guarantees law in the ACL."Quote:
Originally Posted by garrycol
Carver D3 made a comment about Reasonable expectation...these provisions were added from Jan 2011.
Brett....
Brett you are totally correct but similar provisions related to items being fit for purpose etc which override the manufacturers warranty did exist - just worded different and harder to enforce but still there.
However irrespective of what legislation action is being sought under, both are not good in assisting the claimant making a successful claim. If the seller digs in then it is up to the claimant to seek recourse through the various tribunals and courts at often considerable cost. It is a shame that when the new legislation came in it did not make this aspect eascier and cheaper. Many of the consumer affairs type agencies can go to bat for you and persuade the seller to come to the party but if they desist then really the only thing that can be done is legally action with all its issues.
Garry
Yup my understanding that this was always the case.
The result is usually a contribution to repairs from the importer rather than a complete cave in. It can cost you to enforce your rights but they will know when push comes to shove you would win.
In this case I would have thought the vendor who sold it only 700 K's earlier would be the best and most obvious bet for asking politely for some compensation to assist with repairs, rather than trying to go down some open ended consumer law.
Of course if the vendor says no then there is little anyone can do. But if one says to the vendor that your going to take LR to a consumer tribunal then you basically absolve him/her of any responsibility.
There were always two ways of lowering costs in this unpleasant situation, one by seeking recompense / compensation and more than likely heading into conflict with multiple parties.
The other by reducing the cost of diagnosing the problem and then replacing the engine which was always pretty much guaranteed to be stuffed.
The first option is unquantifiable and relies on others and or vague consumer laws that take time and have no guarantees, the second relates to doing ones homework and being proactive to find out what is the best path to keep costs down and who is the best option to do the work and supply the parts at the most reasonable cost.
Most people feel aggrieved in these situations and usually focus on righting the wrong and seeking compensation, which takes lots of time and usually means the individual takes their eye off of getting the job done in the most cost effective and time efficient manner so they can get on with their lives.
Good luck.
Or do both. Get dealer to replace cheapest then fight LR for your money back; which will take time and persistence but is doable. You have rights under law but if we don't exercise them what is the point.
It seems to me that it would be very hard to get recompense.
What if the engine had been started at some stage with water in the sump after being submerged in a flood. There are lots of cars out there that have not been written off correctly or rebirthed interstate.
To me, so little is known about the previous history of the car that LR would be perfectly justified in refusing a policy claim.
That is one reason why a car with a problem that is with the original owner and is known to a dealer and serviced by them is often granted policy where a multi owner non dealer serviced car is rejected.
When you buy a car from a private seller you are buying the integrity of the seller as much as the car. Caveat Emptor.
Regards Philip A
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipA
...X2