Free Traffic Legal Advice

If it were replaced under a manufacturer's guarantee then it certainly would NOT start from zero. I'd imagine the same principle would apply under consumer law, but the experts on here may disagree.

OP, with respect I'm not sure why the question arises because it considers a hypothetical situation....'On receipt of replacement item in September. Does the protection clock start again from zero?'
 
The first place I would look is your contract, not Consumer Rights legislation. And if the answer isn't apparent then simply write to the company and ask the question. When you've exhausted all internal options and if you are dissatisfied with the outcome then would be time to look elsewhere to see whether the result you need may be achieved by other means.

So far you're quids in i.e. a new iron, possibly upgraded, and no request to return the one with the fault which - you never know- might be of a temporary nature. You must be happy with the VFM aspect of their goods otherwise it would be common-sense to take the refund.

OP, with respect I'm not sure why the question arises because it considers a hypothetical situation....'On receipt of replacement item in September. Does the protection clock start again from zero?'

With equal respect HCA, and an element of confusion, there is nothing hypothetical about my question, or my situation.

I have been offered a replacement in September, and I have accepted the offer at face value.

Had my query be posited around the possibility that the replacement might mot arrive...     
Or
If I had phrased the question   "If the replacement product were to fail, would I be covered by Consumer Rights legislation..." etc   
Then, I grant you , you  could consider it a hypothetical situation.

But I didn't. My question is a general "Does the clock reset on receipt of a new replacement under Consumer Rights legislation?".  No "if" necessary or included.   

BUT...

I am intrigued. So humour me.

Why would it have been inappropriate to ask a hypothetical question anyway?   

The first place I would look is your contract, not Consumer Rights legislation.

Nope. My question was specifically referring to Consumer Rights legislation. Warrantee and good will are next steps, if and only if necessary. 

And if the answer isn't apparent then simply write to the company and ask the question. When you've exhausted all internal options and if you are dissatisfied with the outcome then would be time to look elsewhere to see whether the result you need may be achieved by other means.

I have no intention, nor need, to write to the company and ask the question. Unless, and until, the replacement item were to fail.     

So far you're quids in i.e. a new iron, possibly upgraded, and no request to return the one with the fault which - you never know- might be of a temporary nature.

I fully expect that when the item is back in stock, I will be asked to return the faulty item, before replacement is sent out. Clearly it would be a bonus, as the existing item is usable, and useful.  But I consider it unlikely, so it is not a factor to be considered.

And it wasn't an iron!   

You must be happy with the VFM aspect of their goods otherwise it would be common-sense to take the refund.

I bought the item in a sale. If I took the refund, I wouldn't be able to replace item with equivalent for the price of refund. 

Utter twaddle!

Why so rude?

Quote from: JoCo on July 23, 2024, 12:49:52 am

Quote from: H C Andersen on July 22, 2024, 09:07:43 am

OP, with respect I'm not sure why the question arises because it considers a hypothetical situation....'On receipt of replacement item in September. Does the protection clock start again from zero?'

With equal respect HCA, and an element of confusion, there is nothing hypothetical about my question, or my situation.

Utter twaddle!

OK humor me Andy, why is his question hypothetical? am I missing something??

It depends what "the protection clock" means. If it's the 6 months thing, then no. If it's the 30 days thing then yes, because the manufacturer can't get our of their duty to supply a non-defective item by supplying a defective replacement item after 30+ days.

If it were replaced under a manufacturer's guarantee then it certainly would NOT start from zero. I'd imagine the same principle would apply under consumer law, but the experts on here may disagree.

That isn't necessarily always the case.  It depends entirely on the T&Cs of the guarantee or warranty.