John Lewis UK showing base 27" iMac in stock!!

[Brian Y]

Originally Posted by All Taken

Actually the directive applies to any EU member state including the UK. SOGA and the directive are not counter intuitive. There is a reason watchdogs such as trading standards and Which? in the United Kingdom explain the directive in plain English, it's fully enforceable, but disappointingly often takes much hassle and threat of further action toward the retailer, again making John Lewis an excellent choice.

Many retailers and thus retail staff are confused about SOGA, Manufacturer Warranty and the Directive that it often causes misinformation from the public Joe, as evidenced by you saying that SOGA cancels it out, it doesn't, SOGA requires a customer to prove the issue was a manufacturing fault if 6 months have passed, the directive leaves the manufacturer liable for claims if less than 2 years since purchase. SOGA is actually worse for customers as it puts the onus on you to prove faulty manufacture, the directive enforces your right to warranty service.

It applies, however the UK law trumps the EU Directive in many areas - this quote, for example, explains it far better than I ever could (source: http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn02239.pdf ):

Many people are mistaken in thinking that the purpose of Directive 1999/44/EC, ‘On certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees’, is to give consumers a minimum two years guarantee for all goods. In fact, this EU Directive, implemented in the UK by the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002, has added little to already existing UK consumer protection law under the SGA 1979.
4
Under this Directive, all Member States have to ensure that “a retailer could be held liable for all 'non-conformities' (i.e. defects) which manifest in the good within two years from delivery”. However, this requirement is not a two-year legal guarantee (although, rather confusingly, the Directive’s title describes it as such); goods are not legally required to last for two years. It simply provides that consumer goods must conform to the sales contract at the time of delivery. If a consumer can show that the goods did not do so, they will be entitled to repair or replacement of the goods free of charge. If this would be disproportionate or unreasonable to expect from the retailer, the consumer will be entitled to a reduction in price or a refund. These consumer rights are available for up to two years following purchase. If the defect becomes apparent within the first six months of purchase, it will be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery, otherwise this will be for the consumer to prove.
However, as mentioned above, the Directive adds little to UK consumer protection law. The SGA 1979 already provides the same legal rights to consumers to return faulty goods but for a period of up to six years after purchase - a much longer period therefore than provided for by the EU Directive. As a result, consumers should still rely on the SGA 1979 when returning faulty goods.

Plus, there is a fundamental flaw with using the EU directive in the UK - retailers are well within their right to use the Sale of Goods Act in their defence. If you have a problem after 6 months, then they are perfectly in their rights, under the Sale of Goods Act, to not repair unless you can prove an inherent fault.

[All Taken]

Originally Posted by bma

It applies, however the UK law trumps the EU Directive in many areas - this quote, for example, explains it far better than I ever could (source: http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn02239.pdf ):



Plus, there is a fundamental flaw with using the EU directive in the UK - retailers are well within their right to use the Sale of Goods Act in their defence. If you have a problem after 6 months, then they are perfectly in their rights, under the Sale of Goods Act, to not repair unless you can prove an inherent fault.

Exactly my point, retailers make it too difficult to access the standard 2 year warranty claim by using SOGA as a deterrent, the very fact that retailers do this is something Trading Standards are investigating - reason being that any retailer putting onus on a customer to prove inherent fault within the 2 years since purchase is actually a violation of the directive, it exists to make it easier for consumers to make valid claims - the EU agree that 2 years is a reasonable warranty term for electrical items. We need a large scale case in the UK against a company such as Apple, large cases in court often result in clarification of the retailers duties to the customer when things go wrong. Again as mentioned earlier, Italy is better because of this.

I applaud your persistence in trying to be 'correct' but at first you say I'm wrong then you say I'm right. My comments are correct, I'm sure they ring true with many people who just want no questions 2 year warranty.

[Brian Y]

Originally Posted by All Taken

Exactly my point, retailers make it too difficult to access the standard 2 year warranty claim by using SOGA as a deterrent, the very fact that retailers do this is something Trading Standards are investigating - reason being that any retailer putting onus on a customer to prove inherent fault within the 2 years since purchase is actually a violation of the directive, it exists to make it easier for consumers to make valid claims - the EU agree that 2 years is a reasonable warranty term for electrical items. We need a large scale case in the UK against a company such as Apple, large cases in court often result in clarification of the retailers duties to the customer when things go wrong. Again as mentioned earlier, Italy is better because of this.

I applaud your persistence in trying to be 'correct' but at first you say I'm wrong then you say I'm right. My comments are correct, I'm sure they ring true with many people who just want no questions 2 year warranty.

I haven't said you're wrong, but not everything you say is correct. What I'm trying to say is that there are two laws in the UK - Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 (EU Directive) and the SOGA.

In court, the SOGA will nearly always win, since it gives more favourable terms (in terms of length, recourse) to the consumer. As much as I'd love to have a no quibble 2 year guarantee on everything, it's not going to happen any time soon.

Say you tried to use the EU Directive. You take a retailer to court using SSGC. Their defence quotes the SOGA - in every case I've ever read about, the SOGA has always triumphed, since pretty much every term in it meets or exceeds the EU directive (not saying it hasn't happened, but I've never read about it). You can't simply take somebody to court in the UK without proof of an inherent fault and expect to win - whilst this is what the EU Directive would like you to be able to do, it's impossible in the UK (in one case I read a while ago - the argument used in defence was that the SOGA and EU Directive only cover faults at the point of purchase, and therefore it is reasonable to ask the consumer to prove that this defect was there).

[SueG]

Now back in stock high end imac. Just ordered for delivery tomorrow. :-)))

[mikeorchard]

Or buy it through a HE agreement and get 3 years warranty standard