ACL Rights. JBL Speaker Stopped Working

nickbose on 17/06/2020 - 17:59
Last edited 17/06/2020 - 18:11 by 1 other user

I have a JBL Authentic L16 which I bought 3 years and 6 months ago at $1,115. It now stopped working - not turning on.
I contacted JBL (Harman). They dismissed my request for repair, stating warranty is over.

I respectfully pointed out that it's actually not up to them to say how long the warranty is. Rather a product should last a reasonable period of time as per ACL and I don't think 3.5 years is reasonable for a $1,115 speaker. The manager replied, asking me to have it assessed at one of their service agents. That would be a $70 assessment fee and it's about 40 minutes drive from my home.

Question is: Should I pay for this or should I ask Harman to bear the assessment cost?

Poll Options

  • 300
    I should pay
  • 62
    Harman should pay
Electrical & Electronics

Comments

  • PissLUR on 17/06/2020 - 18:00
    +5

    you should pay.

  • holdenmg on 17/06/2020 - 18:04
    +9

    Why not Bose?

    • KSMLJ on 17/06/2020 - 18:09
      +23

      Why should Bose pay for the assessment?

      • holdenmg on 17/06/2020 - 18:49
        +14

        Look @ OP User Name. lol

    • nickbose on 17/06/2020 - 19:09
      +2

      I rest my case. Not, Bose will fight.

    • Aceboy884 on 19/06/2020 - 08:21
      +1

      LoL nice one

    • OzzyOzbourne on 18/06/2020 - 22:27
      +2

      Warranty is in addition to statutory rights

      • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 18/06/2020 - 22:30
        -1

        I wasn’t talking about statutory rights, I was talking about that a company gets to choose the warranty not the ACCC. Statutory rights are different since like you said they’re in addition.

        • Chandler on 24/06/2020 - 13:10

          company gets to choose the warranty not the ACCC

          No. Warranty is chosen by the

          I like to think of warranty in two ways:

          • "Voluntary" Warranty (including "Extended Warranty") is the period of time in which they (usually) won't argue that your issue is covered by warranty. This period is chosen by the manufacturer/importer/retailer (usually whoever is footing the bill for claims)
          • "Statutory" Warranty as explained in the ACL is a period of time in which a "reasonable person" would expect the product to last. This can be (and usually is, in my experience) longer than the aforementioned "Product" Warranty.

          https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees…

    • SetsunaFSeiei on 18/06/2020 - 09:07
      +47

      OP is 100% correct and it's nothing anecdotal of the sort. They should push this with ACL after failing to get anywhere with the manufacturer. This short 5 min vid from abc show the checkout is very thorough https://youtu.be/uE8BB-ioNRw . They explain durability can even be measured in decades. Corporations will obviously add a warranty on everything but it is inconsequential in light of your statutory rights provided by the govt, and put there as a means to dissuade consumers from coming back. Speakers should last AGES…

        • Peanut money on 18/06/2020 - 14:05
          +3

          Let’s keep it that way since if everyone knew the law properly retailers would go bust

      • shamid202 on 18/06/2020 - 17:43

        Great video from when ABC wasnt BS

          • ThithLord on 19/06/2020 - 07:59
            +11

            @infinite: ABC left wing lol. OzB, never change.

            • Gnosh on 19/06/2020 - 11:37
              +6

              @ThithLord: People think it's cute to repeat garbage they have no contextual understanding of or experience with.

              • PAPower on 21/06/2020 - 11:25

                @Gnosh: I'd appreciate if you could explain how left or right the ABC was then and is now. I don't have any idea.

      • Morphio25 on 18/06/2020 - 22:12
        +7

        That isn't necessarily true. How do we know the OP hasn't spent the last 3.5 years thrashing the speaker at the top of its range. It's obviously going to last a lot less longer if that were the case as opposed to it just being used normally.

        Really not sure where the OP gets off demanding JBL pay for the assessment on the speaker though. The manufacturers warranty expired 2.5 years ago. At what point do manufacturers get to say enough is enough and tell you to go away?

        I understand $1100 is a lot for an item of this nature but who is the OP to say that 3.5 years qualifies as 'within the period that the manufacturer should repair'? If I were JBL I'd say you can pay for an assessment and once they find out went wrong determine what the remedy is from there.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2020 - 17:36
          +3

          It's an active speaker, the amp is built in, so it should be able to handle the highest volumes as the manufacturer put the appropriate power inside
          it's not like these are passive speakers and OP used inappropriate amp for the speakers

          any reasonable person would expect speakers to last more than 3.5 years when my cheap garbage speakers have been going strong for 10 years plus.

      • capslock janitor on 18/06/2020 - 23:00

        Awesome programme that was//is!

    • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 17/06/2020 - 18:40
      +1

      You can’t compare a used TV to a brand new speaker.

    • Gronk on 17/06/2020 - 18:57
      +36

      Well aware of ACL, but it does not give you free reign to define your own warranty period based on your opinion which seems to be the common interpretation…

        • Gronk on 17/06/2020 - 19:11
          +8

          I don't think 3.5 years is reasonable for a $1,115 speaker

          Uhuh, read your original post again mate :)

        • TilacVIP on 18/06/2020 - 08:24
          -2

          You know damn well you are not going to take this to court.

          You don't have a leg to stand on. Suck it up and move.

          Perhaps next time you buy expensive speakers (or anything for that matter when you are buying) negotiate the warranty to what you think it should be for the price you're paying. I'm sure they tell you to turn around and get nicked!!!

          • nickbose on 18/06/2020 - 14:19
            -6

            @TilacVIP: I know damn well that I WILL take this to court if I dont get a reasonable response.
            Ever heard of small claim court? Its called VCAT in my state.
            The cost to me is entirely acceptable, but may not be so for the company. So lets see.
            But that is not the question.
            I didnt even ask peeps' opinion about that.
            I ask about the cost of assessment - if I or the company should pay.

          • callum9999 on 18/06/2020 - 15:17
            +2

            @TilacVIP: Without giving an opinion on the validity of the case (I tend to agree with the OP but it seems most people don't!), I absolutely would take a company to court over $1000. I've done it for less in the past (though they settled so I never actually had to go).

            • TilacVIP on 18/06/2020 - 19:25
              -1

              @callum9999: Legal costs will be 5 x that amount. Makes no logical sense.

              • callum9999 on 18/06/2020 - 21:52
                +3

                @TilacVIP: It doesn't cost $5000 to sue a company. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

                I just checked the price for Victoria - $65…

                • Morphio25 on 18/06/2020 - 22:17
                  -1

                  @callum9999: That's the filing fee. So unless you're a lawyer or you plan on representing yourself (not advised if you actually want to win) then your legal fees will far exceed $1000.

                  • imurgod on 19/06/2020 - 08:18
                    +3

                    @Morphio25: This isn't TV, you don't need a lawyer to represent you for this.

                    • Morphio25 on 19/06/2020 - 10:35

                      @imurgod: I never said you needed a lawyer. Merely suggesting that those who do have lawyers have a better chance of winning a case. Especially one such as this.

                      • callum9999 on 19/06/2020 - 11:42
                        +1

                        @Morphio25: No you didn't, you said it's "not advised if you actually want to win".

                        The entire process is designed precisely so people don't need a legal team. If you do your research there's absolutely no reason whatsoever to hire one.

                      • imurgod on 19/06/2020 - 17:58
                        +1

                        @Morphio25: Fair enough, however, I'm not sure if you've ever been through the process. There's no real place for a lawyer. It's just not designed that way.

                        It's hard to explain, but it'd be a little like taking a lawyer along to review the lease on the purchase a new car.

                        • Morphio25 on 19/06/2020 - 22:49

                          @imurgod: No I do understand how it works, I have some knowledge of how the legal system works. You can still engage the services of a lawyer to assist you in your case, help you with case law, precedent etc. You just can't bring them into court with you on the day.

                          • imurgod on 20/06/2020 - 08:14

                            @Morphio25: Fair enough. You certainly can do that. It'd just be unnecessarily expensive IMHO.

                            • Morphio25 on 20/06/2020 - 14:29

                              @imurgod: Depends on the jurisdiction I guess. Where I'm from lawyers aren't allowed in court if the claim is <$12000. You can consult one in your own time though.

        • WreckTangle on 20/06/2020 - 08:54

          But if they win they can claim their lawyer costs from you

  • nickbose on 17/06/2020 - 18:30
    +10

    Ok 10:0. I'll pay for the assessment and keep OB posted on my fight to protect my consumer rights.

    • mbck on 17/06/2020 - 19:53
      +14

      I think you are misunderstanding 2 things.

      I think paying the assessment is fair. It is after all, our of warranty.

      The length of time for warranty is a grey area. However from the sound of it, if they find there is an issue, you may have the chance to come out with it repaired or a refurbished unit. This will not be a cost to you.

      Good luck

    • Peanut money on 18/06/2020 - 14:18
      +8

      You should only pay for assessment if it was deemed faulty from misuse or worst case pay and get it reimbursed

      PM me if you need some info. There are steps to follow and you are 100% within your ACL rights.

    • DangerNoodle on 18/06/2020 - 20:59
      +3

      If I am reading the manual right and its the same model between different countries, it should have a detachable power cord, that is essentially the same as a PC power cord (3 pin on the device end). If it is (not that uncommon, my denon receiver and my episode evolution subwoofer use the same cable), I would say pop down to MSY and grab a $5 power cord and give that a try first, these power cables tend to not last that long and it would be a cheaper fix compared to having to drive it down and pay for an assessment.

      Check if your cable looks like this https://www.msy.com.au/partlist-pl-wtpc-wall-to-pc-power-cab…

      • ProlapsedHeinous on 19/06/2020 - 02:56

        Most kettles have that cord. just try it on that.

      • Nebargains on 19/06/2020 - 06:44
        +13

        these power cables tend to not last that long

        What? Have worked in IT for 16 or so years, not once have I ever heard of a kettle plug stop working. I suppose it is possible but I would suggest highly unlikely. However I do agree, for the sake of a quick troubleshooting step it is worth trying I guess.

        • flubba86 on 19/06/2020 - 15:44
          +3

          Same. I've been fixing computers and appliances at repair centers and in organisations since I was 16. I've never seen an IEC C13 power cord (or the plug on its end) stop working. They're literally the longest lasting thing on any PC. I'm sure I've got some in my parts drawers that are 20 years old or more.

      • gromit on 19/06/2020 - 16:38
        +2

        worked in IT for 30+ years. of all the parts that fail I am yet to hear of or encounter a failure in a power cord. Would be incredibly rare, their just is not much to go wrong unless you are constantly plugging and unplugging the device.

        • serpserpserp on 20/06/2020 - 15:32
          -1

          Maybe DangerNoodle is one of those people that doesn't believe that powercycling fixes anything and swaps out his power cord every time his modem/computer hangs?

    • nickbose on 16/06/2021 - 21:54

      Everybody can now read this follow up https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/630289

  • Nutrino on 17/06/2020 - 18:49
    +3

    They playing hard ball, your move now mate.

  • Ezekiel2320 on 17/06/2020 - 19:05
    +30

    I think it's fair to argue that an expensive speaker system should last more than 3.5 years. This isn't a $50 speaker after all, loads of stereo equiptment lasts for 5-10-20 years with no problems.

    • whooah1979 on 17/06/2020 - 19:17
      -7

      An iPhone 11 Pro starts from $1750 and comes with a 1-year warranty or may be two years if the customer pushes hard.

      • mbck on 17/06/2020 - 19:53

        3 if you pay with credit card (that has extended warranty)

        • Feeblely on 19/06/2020 - 20:21

          Any recommendations? I can't find any cards that will give more than 1 year warranty

          • mbck on 19/06/2020 - 20:38

            @Feeblely: Any platinum credit cards would have extended warranty. I dont think there are any that's free anymore though.

            Hsbc will refund the annual fee (149) if you spend 6k each year.

      • Mechz on 17/06/2020 - 19:53
        +5

        This isn't the kind of object that you carry around 24/7 so comparisons to that kind of warranty aren't relevant.

        • whooah1979 on 17/06/2020 - 20:09
          +1

          The portability of a good doesn't affect the manufacture warranty. We have tools in the same price range that are portable and are covered by 6-year warranties while others only have 3-year.

      • cauilfield on 18/06/2020 - 22:11

        Apple will definitely honour it within 3 years as per ACL.

      • giventofly on 19/06/2020 - 16:42

        Why are you taking the side of the manufacturer? Gerry, is that you?

    • [Deactivated] on 17/06/2020 - 19:24
      +2

      I think it's fair to argue that if someone doesn't agree with a warranty period, they do not buy said product.

      • Ezekiel2320 on 17/06/2020 - 20:00
        +38

        Well thankfully the ACCC doesn't hold the same views as you

        • [Deactivated] on 17/06/2020 - 20:04
          -4

          Why thank ACCC?

          Why not just thank common sense and not agree to terms you do not actually agree with?

          • Ezekiel2320 on 17/06/2020 - 21:34
            +15

            @[Deactivated]: Because without consumer advocacy, you would have to deal with whatever bullshit the manufacturers decided. Please explain to me the mental gymnastics about arguing against consumer protections?

            • [Deactivated] on 17/06/2020 - 21:38
              +1

              @Ezekiel2320: I'm not arguing against consumer protections.

              I'm arguing for buyers to make informed decisions.

              You don't have to deal with "whatever bullshit the manufacturers decided." Just don't buy from manufacturers that's serving bullshit to begin with.

              I don't know what mental gymnastics are needed to turn a 2 year warranty into a 3.5year one. Actually I do. It's called being entitled.

              • abb on 18/06/2020 - 15:11
                +6

                @[Deactivated]:

                Just don't buy from manufacturers that's serving bullshit to begin with.

                Almost all manufacturers/suppliers/companies serve bullshit that I do not agree with.
                Under your philosophy I should… starve to death while naked on the street?

                • [Deactivated] on 18/06/2020 - 15:36
                  -2

                  @abb: Which essential item comes with unacceptable warranty?

                  Most clothing warranty last longer than I care to wear said clothes. Food doesn't really carry any warranty.

                  If you can find a warranty whinge on an essential item, it will certainly influence my perspective.

              • Ezekiel2320 on 18/06/2020 - 15:37
                +3

                @[Deactivated]: Yes, entitled to the entitlements enshrined in the laws of this country :)

            • This Guy on 18/06/2020 - 21:49
              +4

              @Ezekiel2320: tshow is a troll, watch their reply.

              @tshow:

              I'm not arguing against consumer protections. I'm arguing for buyers to make informed decisions.

              So you are arguing for heavy promotion of ACL?

              You don't have to deal with "whatever bullshit the manufacturers decided."

              Arguing for ACL?

              Just don't buy from manufacturers that's serving bullshit to begin with.

              But what about ACL? You were just arguing for ACL???

              I don't know what mental gymnastics are needed to turn a 2 year warranty into a 3.5year one. Actually I do. It's called being entitled.

              You were just arguing for ACL. What happened to informed decisions and not having to put up with manufacturer's illegal bullshit??? (the 'L' in ACL stands for 'Law')

              @Ezekiel2320:

              tshow will argue that the laws of the land don't apply and that expecting laws to be followed is a form of entitlement.

              • [Deactivated] on 18/06/2020 - 22:46

                @This Guy: Too bad you couldn't read the number of years on a warranty and decipher the secret number of years the manufacturer is warranting the item for.

                Glad to keep "trolling" but seriously, maybe read what the manufacturer is offering instead of kicking and screaming "ACL! ACL!" like a Karen.

                (You mentioned the ACL six times in an effort to demonstrate my contradiction of my alleged support of the ACL. I made a zero reference to the ACL. Not sure who you're fighting but keep it up tiger.)

                • This Guy on 19/06/2020 - 09:58
                  +2

                  @[Deactivated]: Come on guy, there is nothing more entitled than a business ignoring the law.

                  I mentioned ACL as that is the set of laws that provides the 'consumer protections' you said you were for. Warranty is usually a misleading statement of a consumers rights, hence why most warranties start by informing you of ACL. They are meaningless pieces of rubbish.

              • DingoBilly on 18/06/2020 - 23:31
                +1

                @This Guy: Tshow posts a lot of this stuff, often seems to side with company over consumer, not sure why.

                • [Deactivated] on 19/06/2020 - 07:44
                  +3

                  @DingoBilly: Check my comment history. I don't.

                  Here is the most recent example.

                  I am simply against people entering a contract which they do not agree with and using legal ambiguity to then justify their entitlement.

                  It's not about consumer vs supplier. It's about clearly defined liability. "Reasonable length of time" is not defined. Expressed warranty is.

                  Being unbiased appears biased when the overwhelming majority on OzBargain are purely consumers and are heavily inclined to side with the consumer before making any further consideration to the overall implications.

                  • callum9999 on 19/06/2020 - 13:59
                    +3

                    @[Deactivated]: The JBL warranty CLEARLY states: "The benefits given to you by this Warranty are in addition to the other rights and remedies you may have under the applicable law and nothing in this Warranty purports to restrict, modify or exclude your legal rights as a consumer under the relevant Australian or New Zealand law."

                    The OP is fully complying with their side of the "contract".

                  • wozz on 19/06/2020 - 18:26
                    +2

                    @[Deactivated]: @tshow exactly right. If businesses don't want to comply with ACL and cry that it's unfair then they shouldn't sell in Australia full stop. Not just go ahead and then try to circumvent the law.
                    What's more unfortunate is that people think businesses doing this is ok because they don't understand the law themselves

                • This Guy on 19/06/2020 - 09:52
                  +1

                  @DingoBilly: I know. They probably know someone who/or owns a business doing tough.

                  Passionate people will often lash out. It was just a heads up that arguing with them is pointless. Fun. But pointless.

                  • [Deactivated] on 19/06/2020 - 12:46
                    +1

                    @This Guy: First you invent some sort of argument I made against the ACL.

                    Then you invent some relation to a business.

                    Then you call an opposing argument "lashing out".

                    I have provided reasons for discourse - the lack of definition in "reasonable length of time" and the existing defined expressed warranty that we could operate on and make a purchase decision against.

                    • This Guy on 19/06/2020 - 13:18

                      @[Deactivated]: Wrong post buddy.

                      I agree with about 90% of what you write. I don't care why you can't see this. But I would like you to be happy.

                      Is everything OK?

                      PM me if you want.

        • Gronk on 17/06/2020 - 20:36
          +2

          Well thankfully the ACCC doesn't hold the same views as you

          And yet we wonder why the 'Australia Tax' exists…

          • dizzle on 19/06/2020 - 14:02

            @Gronk: This.

            Australia does provide more proctection for the consumer than a lot of countries. So it also costs more for manufacturers to support these products. (as well as higher wages, shipping etc). It's also why some brands don't supply to Australia.

        • TilacVIP on 18/06/2020 - 08:29
          -1

          So its ok for the consumer to re-write their own warranty based on whatever they think is fair.

          We'd all be covered for the life of the product.

          • TheBird on 18/06/2020 - 21:49
            +1

            @TilacVIP:

            We'd all be covered for the life of the product.

            I'm not sure how useful that would be. As soon as the product breaks its life is over, hence the warranty runs out.

            I'm sure you mean lifetime of the consumer.

      • Seraphin7 on 17/06/2020 - 20:02
        +6

        But shouldn't Big Speaker be made to pay?

        • [Deactivated] on 18/06/2020 - 06:39
          +2

          Good luck. They own every level of government. They'll never pay for anything.

          • Seraphin7 on 18/06/2020 - 09:11
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: I'm feeling an urge to arrange a protest.

            • [Deactivated] on 18/06/2020 - 09:59

              @Seraphin7: Protest is ineffective. The best way is to trawl their company portfolio for something that can be related to insensitivity and call for it to be cancelled.

              • Antikythera on 18/06/2020 - 23:23
                +5

                @[Deactivated]: not only do they own the government there is a Speaker in parliament and they run the place.

                edit: i just checked. not only is there The Speaker of the House, there is a Deputy Speaker and a Second Deputy Speaker! there is three of the buggers.

        • ProlapsedHeinous on 19/06/2020 - 03:01

          Im sick of hearing their loud amplified voices through my double brick enclave.

        • Gnostikos on 19/06/2020 - 18:14

          But shouldn't Big Speaker be made to pay?

          You can't fight The Doof Lobby. They're too bass too fail.

      • serpserpserp on 20/06/2020 - 15:36

        Well given 99% of products sold into the market are given 2 years warranty max. If you don't agree that is generally long enough than said person won't buy much stuff! I mean even products that give 3 or more years don't actually cover the product in its entirety.

    • TilacVIP on 18/06/2020 - 08:26
      -2

      Anyone buying any product, especially where the warranty period is of importance, would know (or if they don't find out). If you are not happy with the warranty period, don't buy it. Simple.

      • callum9999 on 18/06/2020 - 15:23
        +15

        Using the same logic…

        In Australia you are generally entitled to more legal protection than the warranty provides you. If you are not happy with the law, get out. Simple.

          • callum9999 on 18/06/2020 - 21:47
            +8

            @TilacVIP: Yes. Yes there are.

            Hint: Before doubling down on something you know nothing about - do a modicum of research.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join