yeah, but they would be better able to put an rma through for you. it is kind of on them to guarantee a working product actually. if the manufacturer gave them a faulty product it's up to them to get the manufacturer to fix it. most retailers have an entire system and process for this kind of stuff. things show up to retailers broken all the time. part of their job is to guarantee against that and deal with it if they fail to before you buy it. if you asked them to replace it with a like model that worked or for them to initiate an rma and they refused then you'd be in the right to issue a chargesback.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Also if you aren't in USA, then your country's consumer protection laws aren't a meme and they probably violated them.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Charge back for what?

I read this in Lil Jon's voice

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Yeah...okay.

[–] Exusia 2 points 6 months ago

Now I hear it too. I hear the whole song. GET OUT OF MY HEAD

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

I know we all had to be way more patient and lenient during the pandemic, but I would say that it's way more the store's responsibility than yours for a defective product, and they should take responsibility for the consequences of doing business with manufacturers who have no customer support.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Where do you live that a store isn't responsible for products they sell?

[–] dual_sport_dork 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

America.

Retailers are allowed to disclaim the merchantability and fitness for any particular purpose of the items they sell and most do. The customer is free to refuse, of course, via the simple expedient of going away and buying it somewhere else.

This is partially a blame-shifting exercise to reduce costs, yes, but it's also a shield against the ceaseless horde of dipshits we have in this country who will willfully misuse a product and then immediately try to sue the retailer they bought it from when it doesn't work or they hurt themselves with it via their own stupidity. It is much easier from a legal perspective to make a blanket "we don't imply this product is applicable for any purpose" statement vs. having to explicitly predict whatever cockamamie thing someone might try it on and have to say "no, moron, that chainsaw is not suitable for cutting bricks," etc.

Read all that fine print on the back of your receipt some day. You will be enlightened and, most likely, also infuriated.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Huh I didn't realise that. I'm Australian but have been living in the USA for around 11 years.

Australia's consumer laws are far stricter than the USA. In Australia, the store is responsible for fitness and quality of a product, based not just on its advertising but also what sales reps in the store say to you.

Obviously you can't return something nor ask for a repair/replacement if you're using it for something other than its intended purpose (like using a chainsaw on bricks or whatever), but otherwise, the law is in your favour as a consumer.

Stores must also accept warranty returns and not say that you need to go to the manufacturer. It's not legal to say "no refunds".

Products must last at least as long as a reasonable consumer thinks they should last. For example, a fridge would have to be repaired or replaced under warranty if it stops working after 4 years, even if the warranty is only 1 year, as most people would reasonably expect a fridge to last more than 4 years.

It means some stuff costs more, but it's absolutely worth it for the protection you get.

[–] optissima 1 points 6 months ago

Oh I'm used to the idea of ordering AC units straight from manufacturer.