...any fault appearing in an item within 6 months of purchase is assumed under the Sale of Goods Act to be an inherent fault. That means you do not have to prove the item was faulty, the fact of its failure is enough. If the seller wants to say that you've abused the product in some way, he has to prove you've done that, which is hard for him to do. So most won't even try - or smartly change their tune once they realise you know your rights.
After 6 months it gets more difficult. The burden of proof switches to you: to prove that you have not abused product and that the fault is inherent, i.e. a property of the product that was there already when you bought it. That's difficult, requiring expert knowledge.
Returning faulty goods
Returning faulty goods
Chris Juden
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
One lady owner, never raced or jumped.
Re: Returning faulty goods
Might also be worth pointing out that goods have to last a reasonable amount of time - not the paltry one year warranty you think you've got. I believe the limit is 6 years - although what's considered reasonable depends on the goods.
This is the main reason cars now have 3 or more years warranty - not because they're doing us a favour but because nobody in their right mind would expect a car to only last a year, hence they'd fail the reasonable amount of time condition.
Doesn't work with socks though, a reasonable amount of time for socks is measured in weeks (less if you've got rank feet).
This is the main reason cars now have 3 or more years warranty - not because they're doing us a favour but because nobody in their right mind would expect a car to only last a year, hence they'd fail the reasonable amount of time condition.
Doesn't work with socks though, a reasonable amount of time for socks is measured in weeks (less if you've got rank feet).
Re: Returning faulty goods
You'll never know if you don't try it.