Skylarking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2018
- Messages
- 10,210
- Reaction score
- 10,770
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 123
- Location
- Downunder
- Members Ride
- Commodore Motorsport Edition
As I stated, ACL is based what a reasonable consumer would expect.... To be fair, ACL works on what the normal buyer would expect, and I think you're the only person with such high expectations. :
What a reasonable consumer would expect isn’t defined by the seller, it’s an expectation formed through a consumers experiance with similar products they've bought and in part relates to how the product sits price wise within the market place. What is reasonable is also somewhat subjective and something that ultimately a judge must decide if some consensus can’t be reached with the seller. What‘s reasonable is also a moving target as expectations change over time, hopefully for the better
Given that some forum members owning VF’s have stated on other threads that they're still on their original battery, and others are just now replacing their batteries (VF released 2013?), I’d say it is reasonable for a consumer to expect a battery to last more than a manufacturers 2 or 3 year warranty, especially with the smart charging system employed within our VF’s that go through desulphation charge phase. Well, I think it‘s a reasonable expectation in such circumstances
However, if we start to spruik the manufactures view of ACL, being that staturory warranty duration = manufacturers warranty duration, such won’t end so well for us consumers. We shouldn’t feel the need to help manufacturers change our own expectations for the worst. Their industry bodies do enough lobbying of government hoping to hamstring ACL as it’s written today. Heck it may/could/probably be hidden in some privacy amendment being spruiked by ACCC now (regulatory capture and such)