Query on guarantees

Guarantees is a very important consumer issue. We must therefore feature this case and share the experience:

I am writing to you to share my experience and at the same time be informed of my position. I bought a fridge from Phoenix Domestic Appliances Ltd on March 27, 2003. The appliance was covered by a two-year guarantee on parts and labour.

In September I noticed that too much ice was forming on the back of the fridge (on the inside). I phoned Phoenix and one of their technicians came to see it. He said that maybe the thermostat had to be changed. He asked me to lower the temperature, which was already low (mark 2-3) and see what happens. I did as he said, but nothing changed.

I called them again and this time another technician came. The thermostat was changed again - however nothing changed.

I called them again. The technician called again and said that the appliance had to be collected. In the meantime I was given a second-hand fridge on loan.

A few days later Phoenix contacted me and told me that they were going to replace my fridge with a new one. When they delivered the new fridge I asked about the guarantee and they said that it would be a continuation of the guarantee of the first fridge.

I do not think that this makes sense because I believe that a new appliance should be covered by a new guarantee. Can you please enlighten me about my position? (Pauline Sciriha)

I asked Phoenix for their comments:

While regretting the failure of Mrs Sciriha's first appliance, we are also pleased to note that our client's calls were dealt with efficiently. Most faults are usually rectified after the first house call. However, in this case it was necessary to test the refrigerator in our workshop to determine our course of action. It is our standard policy to provide a replacement unit while a client's appliance is in our care and Mrs Sciriha's letter confirms that she benefited from this policy.

We replaced the client's refrigerator with a brand new one and this was delivered to her residence shortly after we collected her first appliance. Our response time was therefore quite exemplary.

The bone of contention in Mrs Sciriha's letter is whether she is legally entitled to a new guarantee once she has been given a new appliance. This, I may add, is a common question among consumers. The answer is a simple no. This is because we are providing a product and a service according to the original contract of sale with the same terms and conditions remaining unchanged.

As a sign of goodwill we shall be pleased to extend Mrs Sciriha's guarantee by one month to compensate her for any inconvenience caused. (Stephen A. Petroni, managing director, Phoenix)

In accordance with the law, the validity period of the legal guarantee is two years. This period commences on the delivery date of the bought item. With a particular focus on periods wherein the bought item is not in the owner's possession due to servicing or repairs, the validity of the guarantee must be extended accordingly.

However, in this case, Phoenix provided a replacement unit when Mrs Sciriha's appliance was in their care. Therefore Phoenix are under no legal obligation to extend or renew the guarantee/warranty. However, they still extended the validity of the guarantee by a month. I thank them for their co-operation.