Would I Have Still Been Covered if I Didn't Have Extended Warranty?

shertiger on 25/12/2019 - 07:49
Last edited 25/12/2019 - 10:41 by 1 other user

Hi.

So I bought an induction cooktop three years ago and also took out extended warranty at the time for five years.

The cooktop is now giving me problems and the warranty company as agreed to fully refund the money I paid and give me store credit to buy a new induction cooktop.

What I’m wondering is would I have been covered in the same way if I didn’t have that extended warranty protection?

Thank you

• 

  87percent on 25/12/2019 - 08:02

  +1

  Depending on how much you bought it for, you could claim ACL

  Eg; if you bought a $75 cooker, you wouldn’t expect it to last 5 years. But if you bought a $500 cooker, you WOULD expect it to last 5 years (IMO)

• 

  shertiger on 25/12/2019 - 08:19

  Paid around $1400. So I’m guessing under ACL should still be able to go back to store and get repaired?

• 

  cloudy on 25/12/2019 - 08:49

  +1

  My guess is you got better treatment due to your extended warranty purchase. No one will ever know the counter factual

  • 

    Almost Banned on 25/12/2019 - 09:41

    +1

    ^^^ This
    While I would suggest that you were likely still covered by your statutory protections there is a good chance you would have had to fight with the retailer or manufacturer to secure them.

• 

  ode1online on 25/12/2019 - 09:26

  I had a similar experience with a TV
  Its started playing up at 3 years , I contacted the company who looks after the extended warranty
  All they did was tell Samsung that it was a Major fault therefore Samsungs problem
  Samsung replaced it…

  I feel I didn't need that warranty after all

  But saying that I wonder what hoops Id have had to jump thru to get Samsung to replace it with out their input !