Help with kef r900 issue

As an owner of a perfectly working pair of R900s, I feel your pain. But...what is your idea of a fair solution?

Is it possible that your speaker cable is so low impedance that they are causing your amps to oscillate like could happen with Goertz Alpha Core cables used without the supplied Zobel network?

@Tony,

thanks, and I’ll consider and post a complete answer, preserving all my legal and equitable remedies in the hope that KEF decides its position is uncionsionably harsh under my circumstances, and that its warranty limitation fails of its essential purpose since, without limitation, in several phone conversations with sales, I was never warned it had no repair facilities West of the Rockies and in fact was told that Magnolia was a very large retail seller with three nearby stores. Being a lawyer, albeit retired, I have and continue to reserve all rights, remedies and causes of action.

Now, subject to my later or subsequent answer, with my plenary legal and equitable positions, KEF did not limit or exclude Washington state from its marketing activities, and from the circumstances NECESSARILY implied it had some equitable or rational (not uncionsionably harsh) means of effecting repairs, even by means of an independent contractor or local dealer. In fact KEF earns substantial sums by availing itself if the benefits and protection of Washington law. Without limitation, it would have been simple, fair and rational to hire or call upon a local retail seller to come to my home (on lake Washington, a stones throw from where Curt Cobain shot himself, a nice, convenient neighborhood) and listen for, or to the condition. I’m certain we could, in good faith, agree on a qualified person, and I’d pay reasonable travel costs, and split a reasonable fee so they didn’t have a financial interest in the transaction. Instead, I first got a diy, and then the unfair or unconscionably harsh assertion of a warranty limitation which, given the circumstances, I reckon is beneath KEF’s commercial reputation for fair dealing.

I will answer fully soon, asserting Washington and New Jersey’s rights, duties and remedies under Article 2 of the UCC, showing that no conflict or choice of law need be made, and that the limitation is void, or voidable as unconscionably harsh and fails of its own terms, and that I’m entitled to contract recission or cancellation.

Finally, absent a warning to me, Washington’s Consumer Protection Act, prohibiting deceptive or UFAIR practices independent of the sale contract terms, likely applies since my remedy is patently unfair under my circumstances, nor was I warned. 

Thanks for asking and standby.

@Tony,

Since the above posting (which I can no longer edit), you got me started in my legal research under Article 2, et al. Rather than relying on my ancient memory, I’m starting to look at the statutes and decisional law for the rule of decision, and thank you for motivating me.

This will show you public policy in Washington state, which is a measure of commercial good faith viz local repairs:

“RCW 62A.2-719Contractual modification or limitation of remedy.(1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (2) and (3) of this section and of the preceding section on liquidation and limitation of damages,(a) the agreement may provide for remedies in addition to or in substitution for those provided in this Article and may limit or alter the measure of damages recoverable under this Article, as by limiting the buyer’s remedies to return of the goods and repayment of the price or to repair and replacement of non-conforming goods or parts; and(b) resort to a remedy as provided is optional unless the remedy is expressly agreed to be exclusive, in which case it is the sole remedy.(2) Where circumstances cause an exclusive or limited remedy to fail of its essential purpose, remedy may be had as provided in this Title.(3) Limitation of consequential damages for injury to the person in the case of goods purchased primarily for personal, family or household use or of any services related thereto is invalid unless it is proved that the limitation is not unconscionable. Limitation of remedy to repair or replacement of defective parts or non-conforming goods is invalid in sales of goods primarily for personal, family or household use unless the manufacturer or seller maintains or provides within this state facilities adequate to provide reasonable and expeditious performance of repair or replacement obligations.Limitation of other consequential damages is valid unless it is established that the limitation is unconscionable.”

N.B.: “maintains or provides within this state....”

So, obviously, our legislature thinks my expectation reasonable and my position fair, but more important to KEF is that this may be a PER SE violation of Washington’s CPA, and I could seek treble damages.

Again, I reserve all rights, remedies and causes of action ex contractu and ex proprio vigore (yeah, even retired, ....)

Oh, and before you ask, Tony, if there is a forum selection clause, it is violative of Washington public policy, and unenforceable.