[Galaxy S III General] odoto:
EU "warranty" clarification

I know this EU "law" (1999/44/EC, to be specific) is referenced quite often around here, but I think it is way overrated and it does not offer as much protection as many people around here seem to think.

First of all, it is not an act you can point to when making your legal case, it is just a directive. A directive is the EUs way of telling its member states to adjust their national law according to the guidelines given by the directive. So national law is likely to be similar to the directive, but the details might vary. In other words, the directive dictates minimal standards for national law, but the specifics are up to the member states.

Also there is no guarantee that every state adapted the directive appropriately. There are some examples where member states refused to do it, were to incompetent to do it properly... or just to slow. Think about the telecommunication data preservation stuff, there are still member states who refuse to implement those directives.

Bottom line: EU directives are worthless, if your country hasn't implemented them yet.

Second point: the EU directive isn't as consumer friendly as many people seem to think.

For starters, it means nothing to manufactures. Samsung does not have to care about it, because it applies to _sellers_, not to manufactures. It says sellers have to provide fault-free products. If they fail to do so, and it gets discovered within two years, they have to refund you. Sounds good, right? Well, there are some drawbacks.

The before-mentioned only applies to faults that have been present at the time of purchase. The implication is, that the consumer will always say, the problem is due to production faults, the seller will always assume the contrary. The catch is, neither of them can prove their point without spending loads of money.

This problem is addressed by the directive in article 5, paragraph 3:

(Source)

So for the first six month you are covered, because if you haven't obviously damaged your device yourself, the seller can't proof it is your fault.

But after that six month, you are pretty much screwed! The directive doesn't get specific on who has to prove what in that case, but because it specifically says the seller needs to provide proof in the first six month, it can be argued that the buyer got the burden of proof afterwards.

This is a perfect example of an issue that should be clarified by national law, when adapting an EU directive (doesn't mean it actually does).

In case of my country (Germany) it got clarified: reversal of the burden of proof after six month :rolleyes:

And I think it is a reasonable assumption that it was done in a similar way in other countries, since the directive allows this interpretation and the seller lobbies sure did everything they can to make it that way.

So if your national law doesn't say otherwise, you should assume you only got six month of effective protection.

To sum up: if your government implemented the directive, you are most likely covered for six month, through your seller, not the manufacturer!

So everybody living in the EU (and everybody else who is jealous about this "magical EU law"), please understand: it means almost nothing compared to the warranty given by the manufacturer, which is usually longer and more extensive (around here we usually get 2 years for electronic devices, but that is voluntarily done by the manufactures, they are not forced to).

So the whole thing is pretty much only valuable for people living in EU states where manufactures would normally offer warranties shorter than six month. For everybody else, it is worthless.

Disclaimer: This is just my layman view on the topic, I'm no lawyer or something. Also I'm not too familiar with legal terms in English, so some stuff might be lost in translation. If somebody thinks I got it wrong, please correct me ;)

PS: although the EU directive wouldn't help you legally, it might be worse a try to tell a seller, who is refusing refund, about it... apparently a lot of stores don't know about it... and some surrendered when threatened with "EU law".