But I CAN tell you what would happen if one
dared to attempt to obtain a refund on a defective item, fresh out of the box from a store run by our charming Ms. CT Me.
Do you suppose for
one second her actions would be even
influenced by the laws of the province in which she has chosen to do business?
Of course not! Her corporate lawyers (does she hate them or love them? She can't seem to decide) have, in their supreme arrogance, elected to simply ignore these laws. Instead, they have a web site that clevery says, "If a product is defective, the manufacturer's warranty will apply".
As if THEY get to decide. The arrogance is chilling.
Take, for example, Ontario. The CPA of 2002 addresses this specifically. It says that the CPA (and
not the retailer's desires) take precedence.
The link is here: "
Consumer Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A)"
"9. (3) Any term or acknowledgement, whether part of the consumer agreement or not, that purports to negate or vary any implied condition or warranty under the Sale of Goods Act or any deemed condition or warranty under this Act is void."
Yes, there is a manufacture's warranty. But the consumer doesn't have to be limited by it - they can insist on their rights under the law.
So, upon arrival at the gleaming Returns counter at CT Me lustrous store, defunct piece of junk in hand, how might one imagine they would be greeted?
Would it be, "Yes, sir, your purchase is covered by the CPA of 2002. Would you like an exchange, or a full refund? The choice is entirely up to you."
Hah!
Actually, you don't need to imagine. You just need to read Post #9 on the "Sale of Goods Act" thread:
Bookmarks