Consumer protection: refund for a technically complex product in case of a malfunction that occurs repeatedly after elimination
Good day, harbraludi.
I want to conduct an experiment to return my laptop to the seller, referring to the 15-day deadline for the return of technically sophisticated products, and publish here, but already in a thematic blog, the results of the habraresearch. But first, I need to prepare: clarify with knowledgeable people (and they certainly are here) some legal subtleties and learn how to confirm that a malfunction occurs a second time after it is fixed.
The malfunction looks even somewhat fearless for now: the
ASUS X80L laptop, purchased at the end of September 2008 for 16,300 rubles, warranty period of 2 years, was twice repaired by an authorized service center “ASK-Service” (Moscow).
The first time the motherboard burned out, the second cracked the top cover near the hinge on the left side. The crack at its ends did not reach the boundaries of the part, that is, it was clearly caused not by a blow to the end of the lid, but by internal forces arising from the deformation of the lid when opening and closing. The malfunction of the top cover is known and common . The laptop was used carefully and carefully, never fell, it was always transported in a branded ASUS backpack . I even used Kensington Castle .
Both times the repair was made without question. They just took the faulty laptop and replaced the damaged part with a new one - first the motherboard, and then the top cover. Both times, I was afraid that they would refuse to repair, referring to the fact that I used another charger and dropped the laptop myself. However, my posts were not confirmed and the repair was completed free of charge and fairly quickly. The SC even sent SMS about the status of the repair, it could also be tracked through the website and even pick up with a significant delay due to the fact that I went on a two-week trip after the delivery of the laptop to the engineers.
Recently, the top cover has cracked again. In the same place, but on a new part. In the same way, the ends do not reach the edges of the part.
When talking on the phone, the seller refers to the fact that
( From article 18 of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" )
Specifically, the seller presses for a 15-day period, and also refers to the need to conclude a service center, although nothing about the need for such a conclusion in this 18th article of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" is nothing Not written. The service center, which is an authorized SC, declares that it is engaged only in repair activities and will not give any conclusions about the crack.
MAP RF in its order gives such an explanation of the concept of “substantial shortage of goods”:
To the point: I'm going to return the seller the laptop, which I have been using for a year and a half, to return all the money, and at the same time try to do it as quickly as possible, politely, and without trial.
Actually questions : whether there is someone on Habré with similar experience? How justified are my expectations? How to prove that the malfunction manifested itself repeatedly and that once it had already been fixed? Is this a new malfunction? The part on which it appears has been replaced by a new one? How not to anger the seller with his legal requirements and persuade him to fulfill his obligations voluntarily, without trial, without mentioning the word “court” in general, because it sounds like intimidation and anger?
There is no desire to repair - not the third time! So six months later, when the warranty period expires, you have to repair it again, but for your own money. I plan to spend the returned money on a more modern compact laptop or netbook.
I want to conduct an experiment to return my laptop to the seller, referring to the 15-day deadline for the return of technically sophisticated products, and publish here, but already in a thematic blog, the results of the habraresearch. But first, I need to prepare: clarify with knowledgeable people (and they certainly are here) some legal subtleties and learn how to confirm that a malfunction occurs a second time after it is fixed.
The malfunction looks even somewhat fearless for now: the
ASUS X80L laptop, purchased at the end of September 2008 for 16,300 rubles, warranty period of 2 years, was twice repaired by an authorized service center “ASK-Service” (Moscow).
The first time the motherboard burned out, the second cracked the top cover near the hinge on the left side. The crack at its ends did not reach the boundaries of the part, that is, it was clearly caused not by a blow to the end of the lid, but by internal forces arising from the deformation of the lid when opening and closing. The malfunction of the top cover is known and common . The laptop was used carefully and carefully, never fell, it was always transported in a branded ASUS backpack . I even used Kensington Castle .
Both times the repair was made without question. They just took the faulty laptop and replaced the damaged part with a new one - first the motherboard, and then the top cover. Both times, I was afraid that they would refuse to repair, referring to the fact that I used another charger and dropped the laptop myself. However, my posts were not confirmed and the repair was completed free of charge and fairly quickly. The SC even sent SMS about the status of the repair, it could also be tracked through the website and even pick up with a significant delay due to the fact that I went on a two-week trip after the delivery of the laptop to the engineers.
Recently, the top cover has cracked again. In the same place, but on a new part. In the same way, the ends do not reach the edges of the part.
When talking on the phone, the seller refers to the fact that
“In the case of a technically complex product, the consumer, if there are defects in it, has the right to refuse to fulfill the contract of sale and demand a refund of the amount paid for such a product or to demand a replacement for a product of the same brand (model, article) or the same product of another brand (model, article) with the corresponding recalculation of the purchase price within fifteen days from the date of transfer of such goods to the consumer. After this period, these requirements shall be satisfied in one of the following cases:
detection of a significant shortage of goods;
... "
( From article 18 of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" )
Specifically, the seller presses for a 15-day period, and also refers to the need to conclude a service center, although nothing about the need for such a conclusion in this 18th article of the Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" is nothing Not written. The service center, which is an authorized SC, declares that it is engaged only in repair activities and will not give any conclusions about the crack.
MAP RF in its order gives such an explanation of the concept of “substantial shortage of goods”:
Significant are the shortcomings of the goods (work, services) that ..., or that appear again after elimination , ...
To the point: I'm going to return the seller the laptop, which I have been using for a year and a half, to return all the money, and at the same time try to do it as quickly as possible, politely, and without trial.
Actually questions : whether there is someone on Habré with similar experience? How justified are my expectations? How to prove that the malfunction manifested itself repeatedly and that once it had already been fixed? Is this a new malfunction? The part on which it appears has been replaced by a new one? How not to anger the seller with his legal requirements and persuade him to fulfill his obligations voluntarily, without trial, without mentioning the word “court” in general, because it sounds like intimidation and anger?
There is no desire to repair - not the third time! So six months later, when the warranty period expires, you have to repair it again, but for your own money. I plan to spend the returned money on a more modern compact laptop or netbook.