Thread: Scope under warranty repair

You will pay to send over but they should pay to send fixed item back.

Originally Posted by jakewire

If thats correct and I hope it is , can anyone provide a link. it would suit a number of us

https://www.consumerprotection.govt....rt/warranties/

And I quote,
If things go wrong
If you have a manufacturer's warranty
Go back to the business that sold you the product. They can deal with the manufacturer on your behalf.

You do not have to contact the manufacturer, a repair person or any other third party yourself. If the seller tells you to do that, they are likely to be in breach of the Fair Trading Act by misleading you about your rights.

Go straight to the manufacturer if:

the supplier or trader has gone out of business
you bought directly from the manufacturer or importer
you bought the item privately.

Originally Posted by 25 /08 IMP

I have emailed Leopold to find out who should pay.
I know it's not a lot of $ but when we were in business any warranty issues we covered the freight cost as it's part of doing business.

Leupold is not in the position to tell you who should pay. Who should pay is a question of NZ law. Leupold is not the arbiter of NZ law.

Your protection lies in s 6 of Consumer Guarantees Act, which then takes you to s 18 and s 19 of CGA. So Tech's answer at 17 is correct. if you bought it from H&F, NZ consumer law requires them to fix it. you only need to go to the manufacture directly if you have no retailer to go to.

What slightly pauses me in your case is what is this strange thing that floats inside the scope? How big is it? H&F may argue that a tiny speck of dust may not be classified as "not meeting acceptable quality". If the Court or a tribunal agrees with them, then s 6 of CGA would not be triggered.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

Humping and Fisting strikes again.

Yes, you can say that. But how many retailers would or actually do the freight back to Leupold for free?

You are right @Tahr i can imagine taking back my leupold back after ten plus years with the receipt and getting laughed at.Sold with a life time warranty. The problem is NZ retailers like to clip the ticket and they say support local etc etc. Maybe NZ asia should be wearing the cost
Also if it was ten dollars to send back as it should be, no more you wouldn't mind but $45 is over the top

I had an email back from Leopold and the said they cover the cost of the return freight and it's up to either me or retailer to cover the cost of the freight over.

Sent from my CPH1903 using Tapatalk

A distinction should be made about two similar but different concepts:

1. All products sold in NZ must have acceptable quality, must be fit for its purpose. This is mandated under CGA. Defects that are to be remedied under the CGA should not require the consumer to pay for the retailer-to-manufacturer shipping costs.

2. As part of their marketing, certain products pitch additional guarantee as a feature. Such as a number of scope manufacturers offering lifetime guarantee. I do not believe these guarantees are covered by CGA. As such, once a product has outlived what a reasonable person may consider to be the period within which the product should maintain acceptable quality and fit for its purpose, then from that point onward, arguably the supplier is no longer bound by CGA, but only by contract (for the contractual term of lifetime guarantee). This is, I think, the point of s 17 of the CGA. There is no clear authority (as far as I know) that would require the retailer to pay for the shipping cost for something that is no longer protected by CGA, say for example, a 10 years old scope. If the manufacturer's policy is that they pay for return shipping, and someone else pays for incoming shipping, then the presumption is likely that the consumer is to pay for the incoming shipping.

Its pretty simple, if the scope gets to the distributor they generally take it from there, up to you to get it there, (that bit is usually covered by the retailer who sold it to you)

Now NZ retailers generally are either totally ignorant of what the CGA actually means in terms of their responsibilities or try and deflect them onto he distributor.