- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Posts
- 25,718
- Qantas
- Platinum
- Virgin
- Platinum
- Star Alliance
- Silver
It may not provide clarity.. but here's an analogy.
Go into a store and buy a $2,000 TV. Pay for it and await delivery in 2 weeks time.
Store rings up a week later and says sorry we sold all our remaining TVs yesterday and we aren't stocking them any more. He's a voucher for anything else in the store, such as a bookcase, bed, sofa etc.
Customer says I don't want or need any of that stuff, I wanted the TV , or nothing. Give me my money back.
Store: Here's your voucher. We are keeping your money without delivering the TV you actually bought and if you don't make your mind up in 2 years we are keeping your money and not giving you anything.
Would the naysayers here actually be OK with that? I don't believe the expiry of an unfair time period cancels the right of the consumer, in general, of complaining about it. If the voucher had a month time frame, would it still be 'bad luck' to the customer in the view of the naysayers here?
Go into a store and buy a $2,000 TV. Pay for it and await delivery in 2 weeks time.
Store rings up a week later and says sorry we sold all our remaining TVs yesterday and we aren't stocking them any more. He's a voucher for anything else in the store, such as a bookcase, bed, sofa etc.
Customer says I don't want or need any of that stuff, I wanted the TV , or nothing. Give me my money back.
Store: Here's your voucher. We are keeping your money without delivering the TV you actually bought and if you don't make your mind up in 2 years we are keeping your money and not giving you anything.
Would the naysayers here actually be OK with that? I don't believe the expiry of an unfair time period cancels the right of the consumer, in general, of complaining about it. If the voucher had a month time frame, would it still be 'bad luck' to the customer in the view of the naysayers here?