| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 57387 | 2005-05-01 05:05:00 | Why do people still buy from DSE? | jesseycy (1046) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 351098 | 2005-05-13 03:28:00 | sometimes they have good deals *cough* :eek: | harvesterofsorrow (6955) | ||
| 351099 | 2005-05-13 04:56:00 | Morons....Of all the stupid things they could of messed up on.....they forgot to check for the saftey feature on a motorised childs bike...lets all reward them buy buying more of their crappy products. So you expect that they should do a 100% safety inspection on all products that parents are too stupid to check for themselves? Next you will be wanting people to open every can of beans at the supermarket checkout and rummage around for foreign bodies. If we don't want a Nanny State watching over our shoulders, then users/consumers have to show some responsibility and look after their own interests. Let's get real about our own responsibilities: Everybody wants to go to Heaven, but nobody wants to die. :groan: Cheers Billy 8-{) :2cents: |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 351100 | 2005-05-13 04:59:00 | I would expect the safty bolt to be installed,just like i would expect the foot brake to be working on a car, to align that to a nanny state and checking tins of food is pure madness. Infact, is this the real BillyT? |
Metla (12) | ||
| 351101 | 2005-05-13 05:57:00 | I would expect the safty bolt to be installed,just like i would expect the foot brake to be working on a car, to align that to a nanny state and checking tins of food is pure madness . In fact, is this the real BillyT? Yes it is me Metla . :) See, I'm human after all . I too would expect the safety bolt to be installed, and the foot brake to be working on a car, but I don't want government to mandate inspection standards that add to the cost . I don't believe that any of us would want or expect 100% inspection, so the final responsibility lies with the consumer . That is the point I was making . DSE can't open every box to make sure the manufacturer put it together properly, the final responsibility lies with the parent to make sure the product is safe for their child to use, and a missing bolt is a fairly obvious safety issue . Heaven help us if we ever get like America where they have to have inane safety warnings on the simplest of products to protect Bubba and Mary-Kate from their own inbred stupidity . Cheers Billy 8-{) :horrified |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 351102 | 2005-05-13 06:53:00 | This question of safety/QA/standards etc is contentious. I do feel that importers who are making a bomb out of cheap imports from Asian countries have a responsibility to have QA carried out via accredited organisations to ensure the products conform to the appropriate standards. In fact it should be mandatory, in just the same way that Telepermits are required for phone products. This is the least one can expect considering that the bulk of our own manufacturers went to the wall because of cheap imports, often of dubious or non certified quality. It is just not good enough to use the buyer beware argument all the time. I think you would be the first to express dismay Billy, if electrical goods were being imported that did not meet NZ safety standards, and the onus was put on the consumer to put things right. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 351103 | 2005-05-13 07:08:00 | Heaven help us if we ever get like America where they have to have inane safety warnings on the simplest of products to protect Bubba and Mary-Kate from their own inbred stupidity . Billy, those safety scripts in every language ever spoken+ some, are certainly not for the purchasers safety . They are there to absolve the manufacturer, distributor, retailer or salesperson from any liability should Bubba & Mary Kate miss the fact that there is a vital component missing . The fact that most of the blurb avoids any logic or descriptive writing is probably moot because, when the inevitable happens, Bubba & Mary Kate are still going to sue someones sorry ass anyway . It keeps lawyers busy writing dense instructions, disclaimers and EULA's and sueing and defending the protagonists . I believe strongly in standards and QA, but I also believe that people should take reasonable steps to inform themselves and not be totallly dependant pillocks as well . Ironically, it's the non-adherence to standards and good practice that I derive my income from . |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 351104 | 2005-05-13 08:03:00 | I think you would be the first to express dismay Billy, if electrical goods were being imported that did not meet NZ safety standards, and the onus was put on the consumer to put things right. Sadly Terry, that is precisely the case at present. From non-compliant appliances to light fittings and cable, the list is potentially endless because we have no verification system at the borders, and I am dismayed. However I say again, QA is just that, quality assurance on a sampling basis and defective products can and will get through. That is why the end user has to accept some responsibility. There is a price to pay for the flood of cheap goods we currently "enjoy" and that price includes lowered safety standards and a greater onus on the end user to be vigilant in order to ensure their own safety. Some missing bolts is a QA problem and only 100% inspection can ever hope to pick that up post shipping. The place to minimise or prevent it is at source and we have little or no influence there. Cheers Billy 8-{) :( |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 351105 | 2005-05-13 09:31:00 | So a solo mum goes into a shop with her 10 year old daughter and it is her responsibility to check that is safe,I can't for the life of me think that is reasonable. | Cicero (40) | ||
| 351106 | 2005-05-13 10:22:00 | So a solo mum goes into a shop with her 10 year old daughter and it is her responsibility to check that is safe,I can't for the life of me think that is reasonable . I didn't comment on whether it was reasonable or not Cicero, I have only pointed out the harsh reality . As it happens, OSH legislation requires reasonable care by all parties, so one party cannot abdicate their responsibility and impose it on the other by default . Loosely translated, that means we are all in it together, including the solo mum and her daughter . If you think about it, the situation is not a lot different to that which we incur in driving motor vehicles . Irrespective of our automotive knowledege and abilities, a WoF only shows compliance at a moment in time . It is our personal obligation to maintain that standard until the next inspection, and we may suffer serious consequences if we allow the vehicle to fall into disrepair and an accident results . Even if it is safe at time of purchase, the solo mum is still responsible for watching over the safety of the scooter during its useful life and if something comes loose it is her responsibility (to her daughter if nobody else) to ensure that it remains safe . I remember my father regularly checking my bike for safety until he was sure I knew enough and was competent to look after it myself; and regardless of the age of its WoF, our family car was safety checked before we went on holiday in it . I do the same today . Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 351107 | 2005-05-13 10:59:00 | I think there is some cross purpose going on. You seemed to say that one should take responsibility for the condition of a new bike,car etc when purchasing. The reason they have recalls is because they take the responsibility,surely. No need to reply,I am sure we are looking at it from different viewpoints. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | |||||