DOA- do we need to redefine the 'A'?


Goners,

There was a thread recently posted by a seller who was in a disagreement with his buyer about financial responsibility for fixing a malfunction that occured about six months after the sale. Most people agreed that asking a seller to help pay to fix a component that he had sold in perfect working order six months before was unreasonable, but that had the component arrived at the buyers doorstep dead, or had it broken within a short period of time, financial compensation or refund might have been in order.

Here's my question: should audiogon define a 'warranty' period that goes along with used sales? Even just 10 days or something like that? It really would stink to get a piece of gear, use it for a week, and have it die. But according to the policy that the seller is responsible only in cases of DOA, the buyer would have to front the whole bill for something like that. Having a specifically defined warranty period (which would, and should be quite short) might avoid a lot of potential conflict. Thoughts?
lousyreeds1

Showing 2 responses by lousyreeds1

Jesus you guys I just wanted to get people's thoughts. You act as if I've petitioned Audiogon already. My point was that it might be good to define and state the warranty policy clearly. If that means 2 days, 24 hours, nothing at all, so be it. I think that would prevent some problems.

Obviously, some buyers are unclear that they should not expect the seller to help out with any after sale problems. The policy needs to be clarified.
You're right Viridian, I didn't take notes. This was just a notion, and I'm sorry that I seem to have offended people. A ten day warranty...now there's a blasphemous idea worthy of tremendous scorn.