Further to the letter by director general of the Malta Chamber for Small and Medium Enterprises GRTU Vincent Farrugia, featured on December 16, I asked him: "On what criteria was the six-month period established and when is it up to the consumer to prove that lack of conformity existed at the time of delivery?" This is his reply:

I would like to inform you that this rule is laid down in the European Directive 1999/44/EC and brought into effect all over the European Community on January 1, 2002. Article 5 (3) of this directive states: "Unless proven otherwise, any lack of conformity which becomes apparent within six months of delivery of the goods shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery, unless this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity."

This directive was laid down to protect the consumer. What it is saying is that in the case where a defect becomes apparent within six months from the date of delivery; the consumer must prove only that the defect is existing at the date of its announcement; while it is the seller who must prove that the defect in question arose following delivery of the goods.

After this six-month period there is a reversal of the burden of proof and it would be up to the consumer to prove that the lack of conformity existed at the time of delivery.

These rules were laid down after long consultations between all European parties concerned, manufacturers, retailers, consumer associations and legislators. They were laid down to protect European consumers and promote competition between member states to the benefit of the consumer. They can only be changed when all European countries agree that there is a need to do so.

While we are talking about guarantees, here is a common query:

On August 23, 2006 I bought my grandson's PSP. Unfortunately, over the weekend it stopped working. This morning I visited the outlet I bought it from to have it repaired.

I was informed that, as it was bought over a year ago it did not fall under the guarantee and would cost Lm49 to have it replaced as they couldn't fix it.

I was also informed that it was not covered by the two-year legal guarantee. When I said this was wrong, I was informed that there were others who tried and failed. So I paid and it was replaced.

Obviously, this means that the company is acting above the law.

I would be grateful if you could give this matter your attention, as I am also copying Mr Muscat Inglott with this and I feel sure that this matter would be of great interest to him.

Please find attached warranty and receipt. Looking forward to hearing from you. (Louie Von Brockdorff)

All I can say to Mr Von Brockdorff is that there are two types of guarantees, namely the legal guarantee and the commercial one.

1.) The legal guarantee is compulsory and is valid for two years no matter what.

2.) The commercial guarantee is not compulsory. Unlike the legal one, which is compulsory and valid for two years, the validity period and conditions of the commercial guarantee are determined by the trader.

Unfortunately there are too many traders who offer commercial guarantees valid for six months or one year and mislead consumers into believing there is no legal guarantee.