Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 86231	2008-01-09 04:56:00	Harvey norman & warranties	Greven (91)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
628702	2008-01-12 11:09:00	On a slightly side note, I bought a nice LCD TV from Harvey Normans about two weeks ago for $1,200.....they offered to sell me an extended warranty etc etc. I told the guy that the consumer guarantees act had me covered. The sales guy said "all that guarantees you is a day in court". I actually found that a bit disturbing that he would say that (didnt inspire confidence) but I have heard that those extra warranties are a waste of money. I would always feel more comfortable going to point of sale myself. TVs aren't really a good candidate for extended warranties because they are supposed to last for a long time, whereas everybody knows that cheap PCs break sooner or later. The extended warranty is good for the sort of people that buy the cheapest computer available. We get a lot of consumer insurance jobs where their cheap computers get fixed with top quality parts, and they know to buy a decent computer from us next time. After this HP fiasco, I'm sure everybody caught out is wishing they could cut out the manufacturer's warranty completely & just deal with Consumer Insurance.	Greven (91)
628703	2008-01-12 18:03:00	I told a sales girl in Harvey Normans that the extended cover she was describing was covered by the CGA, she then spent 15 minutes aplogosiing and saying she hated the pressure but they had to force it on everyone. I had to ask her to stop going on about it and just get the damn transaction finished. But....I can be a bit of a grump............ Muhahahahahaha I hope you made her cry,I hate to see these girls getting away with things.	Cicero (40)
628704	2008-01-13 00:56:00	On a slightly side note, I bought a nice LCD TV from Harvey Normans about two weeks ago for $1,200.....they offered to sell me an extended warranty etc etc. I told the guy that the consumer guarantees act had me covered. The sales guy said "all that guarantees you is a day in court". I actually found that a bit disturbing that he would say that (didnt inspire confidence) but I have heard that those extra warranties are a waste of money. I would always feel more comfortable going to point of sale myself. You should have asked him to put that statement into writing. That would imply that HN tries to wriggle out of it's obligations under the CGA, if you haven't also purchased an extended warranty. If you had that in writing, and you had to take HN to the disputes tribunal, I am sure that you could also claim loses, such as lost wages for taking the day off work. Also I am sure the commerce commission would be shocked to hear such a statement from HN. I actually think that extended warranties should be made illegal, except for business purchases, or unless they provide something different from what is already covered by the CGA. HN does have a page about how their extended warranty is different from the CGA at www.harveynorman.co.nz , but I think some of the statements they make on the page are incorrect.	robbyp (2751)
628705	2008-01-13 01:02:00	You should have asked him to put that statement into writing. That would imply that HN tries to wriggle out of it's obligations under the CGA, if you haven't also purchased an extended warranty. If you had that in writing, and you had to take HN to the disputes tribunal, I am sure that you could also claim loses, such as lost wages for taking the day off work. Also I am sure the commerce commission would be shocked to hear such a statement from HN. I actually think that extended warranties should be made illegal, except for business purchases, or unless they provide something different from what is already covered by the CGA. HN does have a page about how their extended warranty is different from the CGA at www.harveynorman.co.nz , but I think some of the statements they make on the page are incorrect. I'm not sticking up for HN, but I would think they would have had their lawyers check any wording out before being put on their website and would have had signed off by a lawyer.	plod (107)
628706	2008-01-13 01:40:00	I'm not sticking up for HN, but I would think they would have had their lawyers check any wording out before being put on their website and would have had signed off by a lawyer. Yes I would hope so, althouh I don't think the wording is all that good. One clause I am not sure about is "'Protection Plus' cover is not only the cost of the repair or replacement of the goods, it also covers the cost of delivering the repaired or replaced item to the consumer." However under the CGA consumers would also be covered by this, under consequential loses. HN clause implies it wouldn't be. I do think there are lots of grey areas in the CGA that aren't clearly defined.	robbyp (2751)
628707	2008-01-13 07:17:00	Yes I would hope so, although I don't think the wording is all that good. One clause I am not sure about is "'Protection Plus' cover is not only the cost of the repair or replacement of the goods, it also covers the cost of delivering the repaired or replaced item to the consumer." However under the CGA consumers would also be covered by this, under consequential loses. HN clause implies it wouldn't be. I do think there are lots of grey areas in the CGA that aren't clearly defined. If they are not careful(HN) we have to set Billy onto them.	Cicero (40)
1 2 3 4 5 6