ACCC Warranty and Major Fault (Luxury Watch)

Lwinteroce on 23/11/2023 - 15:26
Last edited 23/11/2023 - 18:02 by 1 other user

Hi brains trust – looking to get some advice.

Bought a new luxury watch last week and the pusher inexplicably fallen off, exactly 6 days after I picked it up. The authorised dealer that I purchased from has offered to repair the watch (also stating that their store policy is "no exchanges/refunds").

But given the fact that it not working as intended (after only less than a week!), do I have the right under ACCC to expect a refund or replacement of the watch as it falls under a "major problem with the product"?

Electrical & Electronics Monards Omega Speedmaster Watch

Comments

xuqi on 23/11/2023 - 15:52

+1

Do you mean the 'Crown' fell out?

If so, and within such a short timeframe after the purchase, I suggest replacement or refund is a resonable recourse.
- winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 15:55
  
  +3
  
  It would be the pusher for the chronograph on the watch.
- HeWhoKnows on 24/11/2023 - 22:36
  
  "no exchanges/refunds" refers to change of mind purchases.
  
  This is a manufacturing defect covered under warranty.
  Therefore warranty conditions apply. Whatever they may be.
  
  However with this problem occurring so soon and with practically no use, Id be demanding a refund as the watch is not of merchantable quality and so not fit for purpose.
JimmyF on 23/11/2023 - 15:57

+1

The AD that I purchased from has offered to repair the watch

The Who? I'm confused at who did you purchase this from??
- Stewardo on 23/11/2023 - 16:04
  
  +2
  
  I’m going to guess Authorised dealer
  - winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:08
    
    Yep authorised dealer
    - JimmyF on 23/11/2023 - 16:33
      
      +1
      
      LOL ok… Not sure why you felt these two words had been the one you wanted to save some letters on, but fair enough.
      
      Generally a major fault is a fault that can't be repaired in a timely manner. In this case, it can be repaired promptly.
      - Jimothy Wongingtons on 23/11/2023 - 16:36
        
        +3
        
        @JimmyF: When talking watches AD is well known, though unless you’re talking to watch enthusiasts, yeah it is a bit much to expect anyone else to know the abbreviation
        
        JimmyF on 23/11/2023 - 16:39
        
        +1
        
        @Jimothy Wongingtons: I see the connection now, but as I said, not sure we really needed an abbreviation in the first place. But carry on!
      - Almost Banned on 23/11/2023 - 16:55
        
        @JimmyF: Nope - that is one way a fault can become major, but it is not the only basis for something being a major fault.
        
        JimmyF on 23/11/2023 - 22:29
        
        @Almost Banned: Go read up what ACCC classes are a major failure and a 'minor' failure. Here I'll help you
        
        A minor failure is where a problem with a product can be fixed in a reasonable time
        
        So in the OP case, this can be repaired in a reasonable time, so is a minor product failure.
        
        Otherwise why have a major and minor failure guidelines if any single little issues falls under the 'major' failure like most on here would like to believe.
        
        Almost Banned on 24/11/2023 - 12:51
        
        @JimmyF: Oh - so you've read one line from the ACCC…
        Good for you.
        Now try reading s. 260 of the ACL
        
        260 When a failure to comply with a guarantee is a major failure
        
        (1) A failure to comply with a guarantee referred to in section 259(1)(b) that applies to a supply of goods is a major failure if: (a) the goods would not have been acquired by a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the nature and extent of the failure; or (b) the goods depart in one or more significant respects: (i) if they were supplied by description--from that description; or (ii) if they were supplied by reference to a sample or demonstration model--from that sample or demonstration model; or (c) the goods are substantially unfit for a purpose for which goods of the same kind are commonly supplied and they cannot, easily and within a reasonable time, be remedied to make them fit for such a purpose; or (d) the goods are unfit for a disclosed purpose that was made known to: (i) the supplier of the goods; or (ii) a person by whom any prior negotiations or arrangements in relation to the acquisition of the goods were conducted or made; and they cannot, easily and within a reasonable time, be remedied to make them fit for such a purpose; or (e) the goods are not of acceptable quality because they are unsafe. (2) A failure to comply with a guarantee referred to in section 259(1)(b) that applies to a supply of goods is also a major failure if: (a) the failure is one of 2 or more failures to comply with a guarantee referred to in section 259(1)(b) that apply to the supply; and (b) the goods would not have been acquired by a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the nature and extent of those failures, taken as a whole.
        
        Note: The multiple failures do not need to relate to the same guarantee.
        
        (3) Subsection (2) applies regardless of whether the consumer has taken ac
        
        JimmyF on 24/11/2023 - 14:30
        
        +2
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        Now try reading s. 260 of the ACL
        
        Good for you for doing the worst copy and paste job that cuts off the end of each line.
        
        But your slab of text you quoted validated my point. So thanks for that. Refer your eyes to this
        
        260 When a failure to comply with a guarantee is a major failure
        1 -> D -> 2 -> (ii) a person by whom any prior negotiations or arrangements in relation to the acquisition of the goods were conducted or made; and they cannot, easily and within a reasonable time, be remedied to make them fit for such a purpose; or
        
        So as I said, this is a minor failure as defined by ACL 260, point 1, section D, sub section ii, this isn't classed as a major failure as it can be fixed and made fit for purpose in a reasonable time period.
        
        Almost Banned on 24/11/2023 - 14:39
        
        @JimmyF: Right - like I said all the way back at the start.
        The failure to remedy the fault within a reasonable time is only one possible way in which a fault can be a major failure.
        There are several others. The disjunctive OR makes that clear.
        It is not the only way and it is not even the most common way something becomes a major failure. They could be you for example.
        
        JimmyF on 24/11/2023 - 16:53
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        The failure to remedy the fault within a reasonable time is only one possible way in which a fault can be a major failure.
        
        No one is saying this is a long repair, just the OP doesn't want a repair. So why are you arguing with me this is a major fault then instead of a minor one that I claimed could be repaired in a timely manner?
        
        There are several others. The disjunctive OR makes that clear.
        
        Which don't apply
        
        It is not the only way and it is not even the most common way something becomes a major failure. They could be you for example.
        
        You're claiming its a major fault, yet failed to provide which point you think it falls under.
        
        Almost Banned on 24/11/2023 - 18:51
        
        @JimmyF: Your original post:
        
        Generally a major fault is a fault that can't be repaired in a timely manner. In this case, it can be repaired promptly.
        
        My response:
        
        @JimmyF: Nope - that is one way a fault can become major, but it is not the only basis for something being a major fault.
        
        This can be and likely is a major fault because no reasonable consumer knowing the pusher would fall off in a matter of days would have acquired the item. That makes it a major fault.
        The fact that it can be repaired does not change that fact.
        Please god learn to read or at least don't chime on on stuff that you do not understand.
        
        JimmyF on 24/11/2023 - 19:07
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        This can be and likely is a major fault because no reasonable consumer knowing the pusher would fall off in a matter of days would have acquired the item. That makes it a major fault.
        
        That applies to any issue with a product does it not?
        
        The fact that it can be repaired does not change that fact.
        
        LOL yes it does, a major 'failure' is generally something that can't be addressed or repaired promptly.
        
        Please god learn to read or at least don't chime on on stuff that you do not understand.
        
        Stop being an arm chair expert on the topic because you googled a few things.
        
        Using your world view, any issue is a major failure and should be instantly refunded.
        
        Almost Banned on 25/11/2023 - 14:26
        
        -1
        
        @JimmyF: Stop it you dimwit.
        You are going into a knife fight completely unarmed.
        The pusher falling off is a major fault because it renders the item entirely unfit for purpose and no reasonable consumer would have acquired it in the circumstances - regardless of how long it might take to repair.
        If you buy a car with a blown engine but a replacement engine could be installed within a few days, you'd say that isn't a major fault. You would be just as wrong then as you are now.
        
        JimmyF on 25/11/2023 - 18:26
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        Stop it you dimwit.
        
        Ahhh yes, insults. How big of you.
        
        You are going into a knife fight completely unarmed.
        
        Do go on, so you should win right?
        
        The pusher falling off is a major fault because it renders the item entirely unfit for purpose and no reasonable consumer would have acquired it in the circumstances - regardless of how long it might take to repair.
        
        But thats not how the guidelines work, as the pusher can be repaired easily in a timely manner, is a minor failure.
        
        If you buy a car with a blown engine but a replacement engine could be installed within a few days, you'd say that isn't a major fault. You would be just as wrong then as you are now.
        
        You would be correct. I would rather wait a few days for a repair, vs 6 months for a new one from the factory.
        
        Also cars are exempt from a lot of the ACL rights, but you with your stack of knifes already knew that right?
        
        Almost Banned on 25/11/2023 - 21:01
        
        -1
        
        @JimmyF: Ok - you go on believing your deluded nonsense.
        Please tell us all how motor vehicles are 'exempt from a lot of the ACL rights'.
        
        JimmyF on 25/11/2023 - 22:10
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        Please tell us all how motor vehicles are 'exempt from a lot of the ACL rights'.
        
        LOL Sure, How about you go try returning your car for a refund under the major failure clause as it broke down and needed a tow. Tell me what happens.
        
        Regardless, my point still stands, I would take a repair in a few days over waiting 6-18 months for a 'replacement' to arrive.
        
        Almost Banned on 25/11/2023 - 22:36
        
        @JimmyF: I have not had to do your example, but I have acted for several people who have and have obtained refunds.
        You are one of those people who are never right and never in doubt. You are wrong about the ACL, wrong about major failures, wrong about motor vehicles - and you continue to pretend you are not.
        You are precisely the type of person ignorant about their rights that suppliers rely on to refuse to comply with their obligations.
        
        JimmyF on 25/11/2023 - 22:54
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        You are one of those people who are never right and never in doubt
        
        Says the person who themselves is claiming to never be wrong and is never in doubt.
        
        You are wrong about the ACL, wrong about major failures, wrong about motor vehicles - and you continue to pretend you are not.
        
        So an item that can be repaired quickly isn't a minor failure then? LOL sure sure. The light blew in my fridge, so I should return it for a full refund screaming MAJOR FAILURE!!! I WOULD HAVE NEVER BROUGHT IT IF I KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BLOW!!!
        
        You are precisely the type of person ignorant about their rights that suppliers rely on to refuse to comply with their obligations.
        
        LOL Why because I don't cry for a refund or replacement every time a device has an issue? Far from it, I've had lots of ACL repairs outside of the OEM warranty. Unlike you, I understand the differences between a major and non major failure.
        
        Almost Banned on 25/11/2023 - 23:16
        
        @JimmyF: No, you clearly do not.
        
        JimmyF on 25/11/2023 - 23:18
        
        @Almost Banned: Hey this person needs your help! Sounds like a major failure and should get a full refund or replacement!
        
        https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/816077
        
        Almost Banned on 26/11/2023 - 11:58
        
        @JimmyF: Well, that would depend.
        If it is just dust that can be blown off, no I don't think it is a major fault because I think most reasonable consumers would have gone ahead with the acquisition.
        But if it is a flaw in the glass, what do you think genius? Does he have to keep the item because the glass can be fixed???
        
        JimmyF on 26/11/2023 - 15:14
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        But if it is a flaw in the glass, what do you think genius? Does he have to keep the item because the glass can be fixed???
        
        LOL and there is it…. You think every failure is a replacement and nothing can ever be repaired in your eyes.
        
        Almost Banned on 26/11/2023 - 16:56
        
        @JimmyF: No, plenty of things can be fixed.
        But just because they can be fixed, it does not make them a minor failure.
        Now, tell us again about how the ACL does not apply to motor vehicle sales…
        
        JimmyF on 26/11/2023 - 19:54
        
        @Almost Banned:
        
        No, plenty of things can be fixed.
        
        Really? You claim a watch can't even be fixed.
        
        But just because they can be fixed, it does not make them a minor failure.
        
        We did this already, it does
        
        Now, tell us again about how the ACL does not apply to motor vehicle sales…
        
        Tell me again how you'll claim a 'major failure' and you'll get a refund when your new car has an issue ;)
Gunnar on 23/11/2023 - 16:01

+2

What brand of watch? And who was the AD?

It sucks but I would imagine a button falling off a chromo is considered a minor fault (so a repair). Sucks thought because it really dirties your experience of owning the watch!

Just also remember though that depending on the brand of watch it can be a minefield for what your options are (eg availability of the watch itself - good luck on getting a replacement Daytona)
- winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:08
  
  Was an Omega Speedmaster. AD was Monards.
  - Gunnar on 23/11/2023 - 16:49
    
    +2
    
    Interesting. Speedies are generally bulletproof
    
    You’d have to raise the issue with Victorian consumer affairs to see what they say and have a more official ruling. I think you may be hard pressed for a refund though (as much as it sucks on an expensive watch). You may be entitled for a refund/replacement if they fix it and there are still issues but unfortunately you have to go through the process. Never mind if you get told they have to send the watch to Switzerland to get fixed
    
    Consumer protection laws (or more exactly consumer protection interest) for the watch market is really crap. You don’t even want to go down the servicing path because of how official spare parts are supplied (essentially a monoply)
Drakesy on 23/11/2023 - 16:10

+1

I'm intrigued as to what the brand is
- winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:19
  
  Omega Speedmaster
  - Drakesy on 23/11/2023 - 16:40
    
    +1
    
    Ooof, that's rare. Still the watch market is like catching a falling knife atm.
    - winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:53
      
      After having a read online and googling 'speedmaster pusher falling off', it unfortunately seems like this is not an isolated issue.. However some of these issues occured in the US where I assume their consumer protection laws are not as robust as ours.
slowlyslowly on 23/11/2023 - 16:34

That watch has three functions, telling the time, telling elapsed time and telling the date. One third of those functions don't work. Time for the AD to earn their commission by exchanging it. Agree with Gunnar, takes the gloss off a $10k+ watch and you desrve an unsullied experience for the money paid (to be honest for the money Cindy Crawford or Michelle Wie could have delivered it!).

The no exchange/no refund is to do with people wanting a different colour face, etc not a major failure
garetz on 23/11/2023 - 16:37

+1

The pusher is removable, and could of dropped out due to user error, its not something that should be considered a major fault.

You need to return it so they can decide what the issue is, i very much doubt you will get a refund or replacement.

They may even charge you for the repair if they deem it the fault of the user.
- winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:52
  
  If i'm not mistaken - but to remove a pusher, would one not need the specific tools to do so; as opposed to the pusher falling off during normal use?
  
  Regardless, it seems to be an issue here and there for Speedy's (https://www.reddit.com/r/OmegaWatches/comments/o3r7rk/the_pu…) - given that a repair would take c. 3-4 months at Omega, would it still be unreasonable to request a new unit since I've had this for only a few days?
- slowlyslowly on 23/11/2023 - 18:26
  
  Thanks Garetz, didn't realise the pusher was designed to be removable. Does change the severity of the issue.
trapper on 23/11/2023 - 16:55

This would be considered a minor fault under the ACCC.
winteroce on 23/11/2023 - 16:58

Also nothing the ACCC states that "If the business can’t or won’t repair or fix the problem within a reasonable amount of time, or at all, a consumer is entitled to get a refund or replacement instead". If Omega requires 3-4 months to fix the issue, does that fall under a "reasonable" amount of time?
- Gunnar on 23/11/2023 - 17:06
  
  +4
  
  ‘Reasonable time’ is relative to the supply of parts and manufacturer processes.
  
  I wouldn’t get your hopes up because you may be about to get first hand experience of how crap the Swiss watch industry is when it comes to fixing a broken watch with genuine parts (I really hope you don’t though)
- cookie2 on 23/11/2023 - 21:15
  
  I don't believe so. Especially not given the initial time since purchase.
dcep on 23/11/2023 - 17:26

On board the International Space Station in 2002, astronaut Don Pettit’s Speedmaster X-33 broke. The crown came out and one of the pushers fell off, and so he was forced to repair it on board, as he was there for six months. With a makeshift workbench, Pettit deconstructed the Omega as a demonstration of the fine motor skills possible in zero gravity. To prevent parts floating off, Pettit used upturned sticky tape. Did he have the right tools for the job? Pettit says, “The right tool is whatever tool you can find that you can get the job done with.”

It's a feature.

On serious note, tell them it's a defective goods and their "no exchanges/refunds" policy does not relieve them from consumer rights on pursuing full refund on what deemed by you as major fault for a big brand luxury watch which expected to be in pristine condition ; not with pusher fell off in 6 days on no damage/marks inflicted on the watch. Every single parts or cosmetic defects / despite being repaired ; affects the value of the luxury watch which in-turn could be argued as major fault given the substance of resale market for luxury watch.

Before you hand it back, remember to take photos of the watch in detail and record all correspondence with timestamps.
coffeeinmyveins on 23/11/2023 - 17:37

+1

you bought a brand new omega speedmaster and the chrono pusher fell off?

I'd be concerned about what other QC issues there are with the watch. You've paid a massive sum for this. That's like buying a new car and the wheels fall off as you drive it off the lot.

Google the issue and you'll see it's not uncommon. which is really surprising for a brand that everyone loves to stroke the ego of.
- Papa Huggies on 07/12/2023 - 14:34
  
  It's been to the moon! Who cares about QC? If it breaks just buy another one, preferably limited edition
MS Paint on 23/11/2023 - 17:57

do I have the right under ACCC

Only time will tell.

You could have purchased 169 Pagani Design Speedmaster homage watches and broken 1 every week for 3 years+ and still be ahead. FF酒
reactor-au on 24/11/2023 - 07:46

What did R Kelly say?
DPW on 24/11/2023 - 08:20

Firstly, a blanket policy of “no refunds” is illegal.

Secondly, the issue you describe, I would say is a “major problem” being “has a problem that would have stopped someone from buying the item if they had known about it”

So you are entitled to a refund or exchange
2esc on 24/11/2023 - 09:07

I wonder how much watch sales have dropped in the last 20 plus years with mobile phone usage.
Sleeqb7 on 24/11/2023 - 09:59

+1

A "major fault" is something that is defined as not being fixable within a reasonable period of time.

Given that they're offering to repair it, sounds like it's not a "major fault" at all, so you're not entitled to more than what they're offering.

Most companies would have a DOA (Dead on Arrival) period in which products with faults within a certain period of purchasing would be replaced/refunded, but it's at the shop's digression typically.
Also their "No refunds or exchanges" policy is probably specifically for change of mind, as a blanket statement like that for faults would be illegal.
LFO on 25/11/2023 - 11:59

That's why people only buy Rolex … and usually only once in their lifetime.

ACCC Warranty and Major Fault (Luxury Watch)

Comments

New Forum Topics