GuaranteesOnRecord

All subjects

Durability

48 established claims - 13 refused by the grounding gate

Documented position30

What the body that runs or defines the thing says in its own documentation.

#

Regarding durability, the ACCC states that there are no set rules for deciding…

  • whether a product is of acceptable quality.
  • how long a product should last for.
other
1 quote from 1 source
There are no set rules for deciding whether a product is of acceptable quality, or how long a product should last for.
#

The ACCC's documented position on durability is that acceptable quality means a product is…

  • durable.
  • free from defects.
other
2 quotes from 1 source
Acceptable quality means the product:
is safe, durable and free from defects
#

The ACCC states that the…

  • acceptable quality guarantee includes a durability requirement.
  • durability requirement is that goods will be as durable as a reasonable consumer would regard as acceptable.
other
1 quote from 1 source
This guarantee includes that goods will be as durable as a reasonable consumer would regard as acceptable.
#

The ACCC states that a good purchased is expected to have durability sufficient to perform its intended functions for a reasonable amount of time.

other
1 quote from 1 source
A good purchased is expected to be durable enough to perform its intended function(s) for a reasonable amount of time.
#

The ACCC's documented position on durability states that consumer guarantees under the ACL apply…

  • for a reasonable time.
  • in addition to any warranties that manufacturers or suppliers provide for a good.
other
1 quote from 1 source
Consumer guarantees under the ACL apply for a reasonable time and in addition to any warranties that manufacturers and/or suppliers provide for a good.
#

Durability's documented position is that any express or manufacturer warranty…

  • will only ever complement the consumer guarantees under the ACL.
  • cannot modify or remove the consumer guarantees under the ACL.
other
1 quote from 1 source
However, any warranty, whether express or manufacturer, will only ever complement the consumer guarantees under the ACL and cannot modify or remove them.
#

The ACCC's documented position on durability states that a reasonable consumer can expect a good to last longer than the supplier or manufacturer's warranty period, depending on the circumstances.

other
1 quote from 1 source
This means a reasonable consumer can expect a good to last longer than the supplier or manufacturer's warranty period, depending on the circumstances.
#

The ACCC states that the length of a manufacturer's warranty may be of some relevance to how long a reasonable consumer would expect a good to last, as it is a statement made by the manufacturer about the good's durability.

other
1 quote from 1 source
The length of the manufacturer's warranty may be of some relevance to how long a reasonable consumer would expect a good to last, as they are statements made by the manufacturer in relation to the good's durability.
#

In the ACCC's worked example on a laptop's durability, a reasonable consumer would expect a laptop to last longer than 18 months despite the manufacturer's warranty having expired.

other
1 quote from 1 source
This is because a reasonable consumer would expect a laptop to last for longer than 18 months, despite the manufacturer's warranty having expired.
#
  • The ACCC gives a worked example about durability.
  • The ACCC's worked example about durability concludes that a refrigerator failing after 3 years is unlikely to have reasonable durability because a reasonable consumer would expect a refrigerator to last longer than 3 years.
other
1 quote from 1 source
Billy's fridge is unlikely to be reasonably durable because a reasonable consumer would expect a refrigerator to last longer than 3 years.
#

The ACCC states, regarding durability, that goods which…

  • are more portable would generally be reasonably expected to last for a shorter time than goods that are stationary and relatively simple.
  • contain complex components would generally be reasonably expected to last for a shorter time than goods that are stationary and relatively simple.
other
1 quote from 1 source
For example goods that are more portable or contain complex components would generally be reasonably expected to last for a shorter time period than goods that are stationary and relatively simple.
#

The ACCC states that durability can often be expected to be greater for goods purchased at a high price than for goods purchased at a lower price.

other
1 quote from 1 source
This means that often goods purchased at a high price can be expected to last longer than goods purchased at a lower price.
#

The ACCC states that, for durability, a higher priced good cannot always be expected to be more durable than a cheaper good only because of the price paid for it.

other
1 quote from 1 source
Therefore, a higher priced good cannot always be expected to be more durable than a cheaper good only because of the price paid for it.
#

The ACCC states that durability of a new good is generally greater than that of a factory second or refurbished good.

other
1 quote from 1 source
A new good can generally be expected to be more durable than a factory second or refurbished good.
#

The ACCC states that, for durability, the general principle is that the more heavily and frequently a consumer uses a good, the less time a reasonable consumer expects it to last.

other
1 quote from 1 source
As a general principle, the more heavily and frequently a consumer uses a good, the less time a reasonable consumer expects a good to last.
#

The ACCC states that a reasonable consumer can expect the durability of a good leased or sold as part of a bundled goods and services contract to last at least the length of the service contract.

other
1 quote from 1 source
If a good is leased or sold as part of a bundled goods and services contract, then a reasonable consumer can expect the good will last for at least the length of the service contract.
#
  • The ACCC states that reasonable durability refers to how long a good can be expected to last in normal circumstances.
  • The ACCC states that, in the context of reasonable durability, normal circumstances means use in the way it was intended or the purpose it was designed for.
other
1 quote from 1 source
It is important to remember that the concept of reasonable durability refers to how long the good can be expected to last in normal circumstances. This means using the good in the way it was intended or the purpose it was designed for, having regard to any representations made at the time of purchase.
#

The ACCC's documented position on durability states that what amounts to abnormal use is ultimately a question for a court or tribunal considering all the circumstances of the goods' purchase and use and what a reasonable consumer would expect.

other
1 quote from 1 source
What amounts to abnormal use is ultimately a question for a court or tribunal considering all of the circumstances of the goods' purchase and use and what a reasonable consumer would expect.
#

The ACCC's documented position on durability states that a consumer still has the protection of the ACL consumer guarantees whether or not they purchase an extended warranty.

other
1 quote from 1 source
Whether or not a consumer purchases an extended warranty, they still have the protection of the ACL consumer guarantees.
#

The ACCC states that the durability guidance was jointly developed by the ACCC and the state and territory consumer protection agencies to help businesses understand their responsibilities under the law.

other
1 quote from 1 source
This guide was jointly developed by the ACCC and the state and territory consumer protection agencies to help businesses understand their responsibilities under the law.
#

The ACCC states in its durability guidance that the relevant threshold for a business to be a consumer was…

  • $100,000 at the time of publication.
  • $40,000 for purchases occurring before 1 July 2021.
other
1 quote from 1 source
Generally speaking, a business is also a "consumer" for the purposes of the ACL when they purchase goods below the relevant threshold ($100,000 at the time of publication, and $40,000 for purchases occurring before 1 July 2021).

Measured finding4

Something someone actually measured, with the method attached.

#

On the topic of the durability of the TV, CHOICE reports that the best answers from salespeople in its mystery shop were those mentioning that a remedy would be available if the TV did not last for a reasonable amount of time.

medium confidenceother
1 quote from 1 source
The best answers were those that informed us that the remedy we were entitled to would depend on the cost of the TV, how long we'd owned it for and the type of fault we were experiencing, or those that mentioned that we'd be entitled to a remedy if our TV didn't last for a reasonable amount of time.
#

The durability issues were products stopping working before they were reasonably expected to.

other
1 quote from 1 source
In the past 12 months, 23% of the survey respondents have had issues with products stopping working before they were reasonably expected to.
#

CHOICE reports that 88% of respondents to its survey called for a star rating system to indicate durability (how long a product should last for).

other
1 quote from 1 source
88% of respondents are calling for a star rating system to indicate how long a product should last for
#

CHOICE reports that its survey of more than 1000 participants found a majority of respondents said it was quite difficult or very difficult to estimate a product's lifecycle costs.

other
2 quotes from 1 source
Of the more than 1000 participants in the nationally representative survey conducted for CHOICE:
The CHOICE survey also asked people how difficult it is to estimate a product's lifecycle costs (i.e. what they're likely to pay over its entire lifespan) with a majority of respondents saying it's 'quite difficult' or 'very difficult'.

Changed on3

A dated change. This is where advice quietly stops being true.

#

The Australian Consumer Law…

  • came into force on 1 January 2011.
  • replaced the Trade Practices Act 1974.
  • replaced previous Commonwealth, state and territory consumer protection legislation.
other
1 quote from 1 source
The ACL came into force on 1 January 2011 and replaced the Trade Practices Act 1974 and previous Commonwealth, state and territory consumer protection legislation.

Disputed between sources6

Sources that do not agree, presented without picking a winner.

#
  • The ACCC states that, regarding durability, a reasonable consumer can expect a good to last longer than the manufacturer's warranty period.
  • JB Hi-Fi employees told CHOICE that, regarding durability, after the manufacturer's year plus JB Hi-Fi's extra year there is no coverage.
other
2 quotes from 2 sources
This means a reasonable consumer can expect a good to last longer than the supplier or manufacturer's warranty period, depending on the circumstances.
Some employees seemed to think the extra year of voluntary warranty represented the extent of JB Hi-Fi's responsibility, telling us that "the manufacturer gives one year warranty and then JB gives one extra year by consumer law" and that after that period "there's no coverage, you go by yourself to a TV mechanic".
#

Consumer Affairs Victoria states that the durability of a $6,000 TV reasonably includes more than two years' use.

medium confidenceother
3 quotes from 2 sources
However, it is reasonable for Danny to expect more than two years' use from a $6,000 TV. He may be entitled to a repair, replacement or refund from the store.
Just like many JB Hi-Fi staff, many of those at The Good Guys seemed to think the retailer's obligation to consumers ended at the two-year mark. Some of their responses included:
"With the ACL, depending on how much you spend, you get covered for a certain period of time. With this TV … you'd be covered for two years. So if something goes wrong in the first year, Samsung would fix [it] and if something went wrong in the second year, we would fix it. After that, there's nothing we can do."
#
  • CHOICE states that durability of expensive items lasts longer than 6 months.
  • CHOICE states that consumers are entitled to a refund if durability of expensive items does not last longer than 6 months.
  • CHOICE reports that Kogan will refund a faulty product only within the first 6 months of the product's durability.
other
2 quotes from 1 source
Kogan says: They'll refund a faulty product within the first 6 months only. (Products over $1000, excluding consumables.)
Australian consumer law says: Consumers can expect expensive items to last longer than 6 months and are entitled to a refund if they don't.

Repeated, with no primary source in reach5

Widely repeated in the field. Within the documents this sweep read, it traces only to other repetitions - which is a fact about our reading as well as about the idea, until each one has been searched for on its own.

#

A Good Guys salesperson told CHOICE's mystery shoppers that…

  • under the Australian Consumer Law the TV would be covered for two years.
  • after the two years there is nothing the store can do.
other
2 quotes from 1 source
Just like many JB Hi-Fi staff, many of those at The Good Guys seemed to think the retailer's obligation to consumers ended at the two-year mark. Some of their responses included:
"With the ACL, depending on how much you spend, you get covered for a certain period of time. With this TV … you'd be covered for two years. So if something goes wrong in the first year, Samsung would fix [it] and if something went wrong in the second year, we would fix it. After that, there's nothing we can do."
#

JB Hi-Fi employees told CHOICE's mystery shoppers that…

  • the manufacturer gives one year of warranty.
  • JB Hi-Fi gives one extra year by consumer law, after which there is no coverage.
other
1 quote from 1 source
Some employees seemed to think the extra year of voluntary warranty represented the extent of JB Hi-Fi's responsibility, telling us that "the manufacturer gives one year warranty and then JB gives one extra year by consumer law" and that after that period "there's no coverage, you go by yourself to a TV mechanic".
#

A Good Guys salesperson told CHOICE's mystery shoppers that under consumer law the customer has two years.

other
2 quotes from 1 source
Just like many JB Hi-Fi staff, many of those at The Good Guys seemed to think the retailer's obligation to consumers ended at the two-year mark. Some of their responses included:
"The manufacturer says you've only got one year's warranty on this, but under consumer law you've actually got two years."

Refused13

Claims the research produced that the grounding gate would not accept, with its reason. They are here because a site that only shows what passed gives you no way to judge whether the gate does anything.

Show what was refused

A Good Guys salesperson told CHOICE that the durability of a $6,000 TV covers a customer for two years, and after that there is nothing the store can do.

Refused: The CHOICE quote only provides a general summary about Good Guys staff and a two-year mark; the exact $6,000-TV response is quoted from a Consumer Affairs Victoria source, not from CHOICE.

Unsupported: told CHOICE

What it rested on
However, it is reasonable for Danny to expect more than two years' use from a $6,000 TV. He may be entitled to a repair, replacement or refund from the store.
Just like many JB Hi-Fi staff, many of those at The Good Guys seemed to think the retailer's obligation to consumers ended at the two-year mark. Some of their responses included:
"With the ACL, depending on how much you spend, you get covered for a certain period of time. With this TV … you'd be covered for two years. So if something goes wrong in the first year, Samsung would fix [it] and if something went wrong in the second year, we would fix it. After that, there's nothing we can do."

The ACCC's documented position on durability is that acceptable quality means a product is safe.

Refused: The quote states acceptable quality means safe, durable and free from defects, but it does not state that the position on durability is that acceptable quality means safe.

Unsupported: on durability is that acceptable quality means a product is safe

What it rested on
Acceptable quality means the product:
is safe, durable and free from defects

Section 54(2) of the Australian Consumer Law provides that goods are of acceptable quality if they are as durable as a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with their state and condition would regard as acceptable.

Refused: The quotes state the durability standard but do not identify it as Section 54(2) of the Australian Consumer Law.

Unsupported: Section 54(2) of the Australian Consumer Law

What it rested on
Goods are of acceptable quality if they are as: (a) fit for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied; and (b) acceptable in appearance and finish; and (c) free from defects; and (d) safe; and (e) durable;
as a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the state and condition of the goods (including any hidden defects of the goods), would regard as acceptable having regard to the matters in subsection (3).

Section 54(3) of the Australian Consumer Law lists the matters relevant to acceptable quality as the nature of the goods, the price, statements on packaging or labels, representations by the supplier or manufacturer, and any other relevant circumstances relating to the supply.

Refused: The quote lists matters for subsection (2) but does not identify Section 54(3), the Australian Consumer Law, or acceptable quality.

Unsupported: Section 54(3) of the Australian Consumer Law lists the matters relevant to acceptable quality

What it rested on
The matters for the purposes of subsection (2) are: (a) the nature of the goods; and (b) the price of the goods (if relevant); and (c) any statements made about the goods on any packaging or label on the goods; and (d) any representation made about the goods by the supplier or manufacturer of the goods; and (e) any other relevant circumstances relating to the supply of the goods.

Section 54(6) of the Australian Consumer Law provides that goods do not fail to be of acceptable quality if the consumer causes them to become of unacceptable quality and they are damaged by abnormal use.

Refused: The quote states the substantive rule but does not identify it as Section 54(6) of the Australian Consumer Law.

Unsupported: Section 54(6) of the Australian Consumer Law

What it rested on
Goods do not fail to be of acceptable quality if: (a) the consumer to whom they are supplied causes them to become of unacceptable quality, or fails to take reasonable steps to prevent them from becoming of unacceptable quality; and (b) they are damaged by abnormal use.

The documented position on durability is that the ACCC states that consumer guarantees may continue to apply during the period of a manufacturer's or supplier's warranty.

Refused: The quote says 'those warranties' but does not specify they are manufacturer's or supplier's warranties.

Unsupported: manufacturer's or supplier's

What it rested on
This means consumer guarantees may continue to apply during the period of those warranties and after those warranties expire.

The documented position on durability is that the ACCC states that consumer guarantees may continue to apply after the manufacturer's or supplier's warranties expire.

Refused: The quote says consumer guarantees may continue after 'those warranties' expire, but does not specify that they are manufacturer's or supplier's warranties.

Unsupported: manufacturer's or supplier's warranties

What it rested on
This means consumer guarantees may continue to apply during the period of those warranties and after those warranties expire.

The ACCC gives a worked example concerning a laptop's durability.

Refused: The quote shows the ACCC discusses a laptop's durability but does not establish it is presented as a worked example.

Unsupported: worked example

What it rested on
This is because a reasonable consumer would expect a laptop to last for longer than 18 months, despite the manufacturer's warranty having expired.

A Good Guys salesperson told CHOICE's mystery shoppers that the manufacturer gives only one year's warranty on the TV.

Refused: The quotes only say 'on this' and do not specify a TV.

Unsupported: on the TV

What it rested on
Just like many JB Hi-Fi staff, many of those at The Good Guys seemed to think the retailer's obligation to consumers ended at the two-year mark. Some of their responses included:
"The manufacturer says you've only got one year's warranty on this, but under consumer law you've actually got two years."

CHOICE reports that Kogan says, regarding durability, it will refund a faulty product within the first 6 months.

Refused: The quote states Kogan will refund a faulty product within the first 6 months only, but it does not say this policy is regarding durability.

Unsupported: regarding durability

What it rested on
Kogan says: They'll refund a faulty product within the first 6 months only. (Products over $1000, excluding consumables.)

CHOICE reports that Kogan says, regarding durability, it will refund a faulty product only if the product costs over $1000.

Refused: The quote mentions 'faulty product' but does not state or clearly entail that Kogan's statement concerned durability.

Unsupported: regarding durability

What it rested on
Kogan says: They'll refund a faulty product within the first 6 months only. (Products over $1000, excluding consumables.)

CHOICE reports that Kogan says, regarding durability, the refund for a faulty product excludes consumables.

Refused: The quote mentions refunds for faulty products excluding consumables but does not tie the policy to durability.

Unsupported: regarding durability

What it rested on
Kogan says: They'll refund a faulty product within the first 6 months only. (Products over $1000, excluding consumables.)

CHOICE reports that a nationally representative survey found that 23% of respondents had durability issues in the past 12 months.

Refused: The quote says 23% of survey respondents had durability issues in the past 12 months but does not state the survey was nationally representative.

Unsupported: nationally representative survey

What it rested on
In the past 12 months, 23% of the survey respondents have had issues with products stopping working before they were reasonably expected to.