That is your interpretation but imho is simply untrue. I respect your interpretations and would appreciate a similar outlook from other contributors. Robust debate is healthy.Quote:
Originally Posted by jack620
No acknowledgement of failure was ever given - expressly or implied - they were simply offering an unhappy customer a remedy under the ACL as a responsible retailer.
Did they have an obligation to, or were they offering a resolution in excess of their obligations? another point of interpretation. It is pure conjecture how wide spread this "alleged issue" of failures is!
I shared my experience to illustrate that there is a course of action available that achieved an acceptable outcome for me in response to the question "Is there somewhere I can report these jokers?"
Rather than spray a company with "unsupported allegations" (another point of interpretation) on social media I chose to access the remedies available to me through firstly the retailer, then the importer - they honored and most likely exceeded their obligations under ACL.
The OFT and ACCC were firstly contacted for advice on how to proceed and then notified of a "potential fault" affecting the devices.
IF the alleged failures are as widespread as the social media commentary suggests - then something should be done about a recall - that will only happen if the company is forced to recall the devices. No notifications of failures, means an under reported fault, which means no action by the OFT or ACCC. Simple!
