Originally Posted by Damarious25
Wow starbuck, thanks for the insight. Actually the first computer game was around 1958 so the Act came LONG after the first computer game. Although obviously we're not talking about those older games, the "news" is about modern games. But........
To amend a law is to add to it. This hasn't been added. Not even close. Do you realize how many channels something like this would have to go through before it was actually "amended"??? I'm sure if an idea like this was even suggested by a reputable source it would have been watched like a hawk by gamers and and tech fans alike.
To just show up and say it's amended is like saying "Hey, you can now shoot people for no reason."
If you actually read the "The Sale of Goods Act 1979" and any amendments it doesn't say anything about "computers" or "gamers"
This thread, although a good idea, is epic fail.
EDIT: If there was a major loophole in an Act that allowed the return of games or software purchased I'm sure it would have been fully exploited during the games boom of the 80's or LONG since patched up by the bigger software companies.
I mean any game or piece of software that's buggy or unfinished can be returned?! That means every OS ever purchased should have been returned. If you buy Windows and a security update comes within the first 30 days you'd have a retail nightmare because everyone would be running to get their money back.
It's just not logical for this "news story" to even be considered. The "idea" of it discussed, YES. But to put false hope in a younger person who may decide it's alright to go buy a new game thinking they can return it in a few days because they think it's the law?! Shame...
The Act was last amended in 2002 under the: The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002.
All I can say is unless you want to look like a complete idiot, go and google the act, read about it and come back. Because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
For one, you expect this law to be an idea. It's a law. It's already in force.
Later on in this post I wil describe the act and how to claim under it. THEN you will fully understand it and you WILL realise all your posts have been ridiculous.
Originally Posted by beers
There's a few million 12 year olds that want to play black ops anyway.
Try talking a 12 year old out of buying/beggingmom black ops.
Ha, my 11 year old wanted it so badly and I told him no. He's 11 and not old enough for it. I told him if he borrows it from a friend I'll break the disc and he'll owe his friend a new game.
Originally Posted by beers
Would you feel you deserve a refund if you purchased a new car and only half of the advertised functions worked?
Damn right you would.
Under the act all goods purchased must be:
Of Satisfactory Quality
Fit for Purpose
Of satisfactory quality means the product should LAST a reasonable amount of time (which is given as 6 years) and should not break under reasonable use; such as using it.
Fit for Purpose means it should do the job is is supposed to do.
As stated means it will work as you would expect.
What this means is if you went to a shop and bought, for instance, a printer. If the salesman said it will work with your computer, then it should work with your computer. If it doesn't, it's not as stated. If it prints for a short while, then breaks, it's not of satisfactory quality nor fit for purpose.
The law also gives time periods for claims.
If the product or good because unrelaible or faulty within 28 days of purchase, then the retailer MUST replace or repair the item. Under 28 days you aer entitled to a full refund and NO restocking fee can be charged. The Retailer has the onus to prove the product is within good working order.
After 28 days the onus of proof is on the buyer to prove goods are not within requirements or fit for purpose.
An example of how the law has protected consumers is the Nvidia GPU chip defect that happened a couple of years ago. HP, Dell and others were dragging their feet over the whole ordeal and tried to claim it was Nvidia's problem. However the law in the UK states it's their problem. There was a forum and website set up for people to get an independant engineers report to prove the products were faulty from the word go.
Originally Posted by Damarious25
The problem is this is just an idea. Just because the "Trading Standards" feel it's a good idea they have a LOT of work ahead of them before it could be put into practice. They can't amend laws, the government does that. That's my point. I'm not familiar with the judicial system over there but I assume it's pretty close to the Canadian one seeing how we're a pretty good copy. It takes time and a lot of government bodies have to approve of an amendment before it can be passed into law. It could take years.
People here are talking like it's now, or a stone throw away... Which it's not.
Rubbish. You don't know what you're talking about. IT ALREADY IS IN PRACTICE. Trading Standards aren't ideas out there, they're responding to a consumers question and the answer is yes, if a game is buggy then you are entitled to return it to the retaielr under the Sales of Goods Act.
There is nothing to amend. Stop talking about this subject because you are annoying.
Originally Posted by Lefty67
So can I ask steam if I can have my money back for Blk ops?
No, because you're not in the UK.
Originally Posted by Cepheus
Ah, but it is. They aren't proposing to amend any kind of law - what they're saying is that under their interpretation of existing laws, gamers should be able to exert their statutory rights. I'm not sure if anyone would want to do this though, since the retailer could just bury their head in the sand and you'd be forced to go to the Small Claims court - which is kinda tiring.
Trading standards doesn't set the rules - but it interprets them according to what it sees the laws to mean in specific situations in order to give advice to consumers.
Yeah, but as the whole Nvidia defect thing panned out, retailers dragged their feet hoping people would piss off and give up. However the second the claims forms landed on their office desks there were store credits for everything including the full price of said laptops, the cost of the engineers reports, papers and the lot being sent out.
They drag their feet so that you give up. All you have to do is show reasonable attempts to get a settlement of sorts. You should show willing to accept a repair or replacement (but demand a warranty of 2-3 years on that repair/replacement which of course the company usually refuses, which means refund time for you.) and write a few letters. Before you file the claims papers you must send a letter informing them of a deadline to comply (which they ignore) let the deadline expire, file the SSC papers.
I've returned two HP laptops to Comet this way via the forum below. The Sales of Goods Act is the best consumer protection law in existance. The problem is NO-ONE exherts their right
Sorry for the tone in this post, but I couldn't believe what I was reading. How can someone completely miss the point and make several posts afterwards without being told? The Sales of Goods Act is already a law. Trading Standards don't need to do very much because it's already law.Edited by Viridian - 1/3/11 at 7:01am