Good or bad?

[Gibbo89]

Gibbo89 i hope you find something suitable and not to pricey.

thanks, i hope so too

[Ratti]

2.B. , How do you know we are talking about the same customer? He came to me through a recomendation from one of the bike shops here in the Hutt.

the pix I posted speak for themselves really. But please, do carry on digging your hole.
We have this nifty bit of legislation here in NZ called the Consumer Protection Act. One of the interesting bits in the Act is that goods sold MUST be fit for purpose. The trou you sold this person are most definatly NOT fit for purpose. SO the very least you can do is replace or refund.

[nallac]

shit, i was thinking about getting a pair of lincra pants off trademe,but i can see they won't suit a
NI'r like me,and i never thought i was gay(sold the Honda) but i must be cause it says it on the net.

[200BUSA]

2.B. , How do you know we are talking about the same customer? He came to me through a recomendation from one of the bike shops here in the Hutt.

the pix I posted speak for themselves really. But please, do carry on digging your hole.
We have this nifty bit of legislation here in NZ called the Consumer Protection Act. One of the interesting bits in the Act is that goods sold MUST be fit for purpose. The trou you sold this person are most definatly NOT fit for purpose. SO the very least you can do is replace or refund.

And what does the ACT say about not contacting a seller to say there is a problem - then giving to someone else to repair and pull and poke at them to make the pictures look bad that they then post up on the Net?

[st00ji]

i find myself hoping all this carry on is some laboured attempt at a troll

for what its worth your attitude in this thread alone is enough to convince me never to buy from you, pretty much regardless of any other factors. im sure im not the only one! im sure you'll make some witty comment about the island i happen to live in (if you would like to try something a bit different i was also born in australia) but the truth is you are shooting yourself in the foot with this shit. i suggest you plead temporary insanity and exit the thread

[flyingcrocodile46]

It's the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 No 91 (as at 01 August 2009), Public Act

If I was the buyer and had to deal with a shit head retailer like yourself, I would make you refund my money or make your life an absolute misery before invoking the Act with the commerce commission and have them make you refund the money as well as censuring you for being a shithead.

Section 6 Guarantee as to acceptable quality

• (1) Subject to section 41 of this Act, where goods are supplied to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods are of acceptable quality.
  
  (2) Where the goods fail to comply with the guarantee in this section,—
  
  • (a) Part 2 of this Act may give the consumer a right of redress against the supplier; and
  
  
  
  • (b) Part 3 of this Act may give the consumer a right of redress against the manufacturer.
  
  
  Compare: 1908 No 168 s 16(b); 1971 No 147 s 12; Consumer Products Warranties Act 1977, s 11(4), 11(7) (Saskatchewan)

Section 7 Meaning of acceptable quality

• (1) For the purposes of section 6 of this Act, goods are of acceptable quality if they are as—
  
  • (a) Fit for all the purposes for which goods of the type in question are commonly supplied; and
  
  
  
  • (b) Acceptable in appearance and finish; and
  
  
  
  • (c) Free from minor defects; and
  
  
  
  • (d) Safe; and
  
  
  
  • (e) Durable,—
  
  as a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the state and condition of the goods, including any hidden defects, would regard as acceptable, having regard to—
  
  
  • (f) The nature of the goods:
  
  
  
  • (g) The price (where relevant):
  
  
  
  • (h) Any statements made about the goods on any packaging or label on the goods:
  
  
  
  • (i) Any representation made about the goods by the supplier or the manufacturer:
  
  
  
  • (j) All other relevant circumstances of the supply of the goods.
  
  
  (2) Where any defects in goods have been specifically drawn to the consumer's attention before he or she agreed to the supply, then notwithstanding that a reasonable consumer may not have regarded the goods as acceptable with those defects, the goods will not fail to comply with the guarantee as to acceptable quality by reason only of those defects.
  
  (3) Where goods are displayed for sale or hire, the defects that are to be treated as having been specifically drawn to the consumer's attention for the purposes of subsection (2) of this section are those disclosed on a written notice displayed with the goods.
  
  (4) Goods will not fail to comply with the guarantee of acceptable quality if—
  
  
  • (a) The goods have been used in a manner, or to an extent which is inconsistent with the manner or extent of use that a reasonable consumer would expect to obtain from the goods; and
  
  
  
  • (b) The goods would have complied with the guarantee of acceptable quality if they had not been used in that manner or to that extent.
  
  
  (5) A reference in subsections (2) and (3) of this section to a defect means any failure of the goods to comply with the guarantee of acceptable quality.
  
  Compare: Consumer Products Warranties Act 1977, ss 2(a), 34 (Saskatchewan)

Section 8 Guarantees as to fitness for particular purpose

• (1) Subject to section 41 of this Act, the following guarantees apply where goods are supplied to a consumer:
  
  • (a) That the goods are reasonably fit for any particular purpose that the consumer makes known, expressly or by implication, to the supplier as the purpose for which the goods are being acquired by the consumer; and
  
  
  
  • (b) That the goods are reasonably fit for any particular purpose for which the supplier represents that they are or will be fit.
  
  
  (2) Those guarantees do not apply where the circumstances show that—
  
  
  • (a) The consumer does not rely on the supplier's skill or judgment; or
  
  
  
  • (b) It is unreasonable for the consumer to rely on the supplier's skill or judgment.
  
  
  (3) This section applies whether or not the purpose is a purpose for which the goods are commonly supplied.
  
  (4) Part 2 of this Act gives the consumer a right of redress against the supplier where the goods fail to comply with any guarantee in this section.
  
  Compare: 1908 No 168 s 16(a); 1971 No 147 s 13

Section 9 Guarantee that goods comply with description

• (1) Subject to section 41 of this Act, where goods are supplied by description to a consumer, there is a guarantee that the goods correspond with the description.
  
  (2) A supply of goods is not prevented from being a supply by description by reason only that, being exposed for sale or hire, they are selected by a consumer.
  
  (3) If the goods are supplied by reference to a sample or demonstration model as well as by description, the guarantees in this section and in section 10 of this Act will both apply.
  
  (4) Where the goods fail to comply with the guarantee in this section,—
  
  • (a) Part 2 of this Act gives the consumer a right of redress against the supplier; and
  
  
  
  • (b) Part 3 of this Act may give the consumer a right of redress against the manufacturer.
  
  
  Compare: 1908 No 168 s 15; 1971 No 147 s 14(2); Trade Practices Act 1974, s 70(2) (Australia)

Section 18 Options against suppliers where goods do not comply with guarantees

• (1) Where a consumer has a right of redress against the supplier in accordance with this Part of this Act in respect of the failure of any goods to comply with a guarantee, the consumer may exercise the following remedies.
  
  (2) Where the failure can be remedied, the consumer may—
  
  • (a) Require the supplier to remedy the failure within a reasonable time in accordance with section 19 of this Act:
  
  
  
  • (b) Where a supplier who has been required to remedy a failure refuses or neglects to do so, or does not succeed in doing so within a reasonable time,—
    
    • (i) Have the failure remedied elsewhere and obtain from the supplier all reasonable costs incurred in having the failure remedied; or
    
    
    
    • (ii) Subject to section 20 of this Act, reject the goods in accordance with section 22 of this Act.
    
    
  
  
  (3) Where the failure cannot be remedied or is of a substantial character within the meaning of section 21 of this Act, the consumer may—
  
  
  • (a) Subject to section 20 of this Act, reject the goods in accordance with section 22 of this Act; or
  
  
  
  • (b) Obtain from the supplier damages in compensation for any reduction in value of the goods below the price paid or payable by the consumer for the goods.
  
  
  (4) In addition to the remedies set out in subsection (2) and subsection (3) of this section, the consumer may obtain from the supplier damages for any loss or damage to the consumer resulting from the failure (other than loss or damage through reduction in value of the goods) which was reasonably foreseeable as liable to result from the failure.
  
  Compare: Consumer Products Warranties Act 1977, s 20(1) (Saskatchewan)

Section 19 Requirement to remedy

• (1) A supplier may comply with a requirement to remedy a failure of any goods to comply with a guarantee—
  
  • (a) By—
    
    • (i) Repairing the goods (in any case where the failure does not relate to title); or
    
    
    
    • (ii) Curing any defect in title (in any case where the failure relates to title); or
    
    
  
  
  
  • (b) By replacing the goods with goods of identical type; or
  
  
  
  • (c) Where the supplier cannot reasonably be expected to repair the goods, by providing a refund of any money paid or other consideration provided by the consumer in respect of the goods.
  
  
  (2) Where a consumer obtains goods to replace defective goods pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the replacement goods shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be supplied by the supplier and the guarantees and obligations arising under this Act consequent upon a supply of goods to a consumer shall apply to the replacement goods.
  
  (3) A refund referred to in subsection (1)(c) of this section means a refund in cash of the money paid or the value of any other consideration provided, or both, as the case may require.
  

[crazyhorse]

Does it matter what you wear in the mall? I'd wear my leather jacket anywhere - or my technics one. I really wouldn't care what people thiink - you ride a bike don't ya? Well, do what you want....... go get it

[Ratti]

And what does the ACT say about not contacting a seller to say there is a problem - then giving to someone else to repair and pull and poke at them to make the pictures look bad that they then post up on the Net?

Read it again, he told me he did contact you and was told 'Not my problem'. lol, i didn't have to pull and poke to make 'em "look bad" dear- the shoddy workmanship speaks for itself.

It's the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 No 91 (as at 01 August 2009), Public Act

If I was the buyer and had to deal with a shit head retailer like yourself, I would make you refund my money or make your life an absolute misery before invoking the Act with the commerce commission and have them make you refund the money as well as censuring you for being a shithead. [/LIST]

Thanks Croc. I stand corrected.
I do believe the Commerce Commission might be interested in this case. Or even FairGo? WIth all the fuss about ACC of late, and how much bikers cost the country, it might be a good time to bring up a case for formal standards to be created and applied to riding gear sold in NZ....

[John_H]

[QUOTE=200BUSA;1129787377]

Oddly enough, this appears to support the information my potential customer ( remember I turned the work down on ethical grounds ) told me had happend. All I can say is, one less dodgy trader out of the market, and that can only be a good thing.

And did your potential customer tell you they got a replacement pair od pants then tried to get there ones fixed. NO. Idont have to answer to you Ratti - if i am a dodgy trader then i wont say what you are but it isnt nice. Get your facts right befroe you open that massive big mouth you have. But at least you have a lot of Gay followers up there in the North Island. And just to annoy you and your fuck wit mates we will still be around with our good gear.

Go away.

[Neshi]

Just the first reaction he gave

so i reckon you are full of shit

made me scratch him of my potential buy list.

[Eyegasm]

Please continue....

I only just pulled up a chair

[FatHead]

Try this guy on Trademe http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Mo...-298776152.htm. I found him very easy to trade with and he is a motorcyclist himself his trader name is Vadernz

[Gibbo89]

Try this guy on Trademe http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Mo...-298776152.htm. I found him very easy to trade with and he is a motorcyclist himself his trader name is Vadernz

thanks, def worth a look

[Gibbo89]

hi guys,

im still on the hunt for a jacket. has anyone owned a strada viaggio ex jacket?

i saw it at leather direct and seems to be a good price, as far as bike jackets go.

maybe some1 can also tell me the diff between that and a strada viaggio jacket (without the ex), from looking at them, 1 has vents and the other doesnt, i doubt that is the only difference in the two jackets?

thanks

[Vinz0r]

I have a Viaggioex, got a good deal on it from Boyds in Hamilton. Had an off in it at 60kph and no damage at all to the jacket, has removable armour and is pretty damn warm, has a removable thermal liner etc.