What remedial action would court grant, if any?

[MT143]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? MT

Hi all, I recently entered a store and spoke to an employee about buying a product with specific capabilities. He directed me to one model and told me it did what I wanted. He gave me a quote and I left. I found the same model online for less and purchased it online. I had the store, mentioned above, install the product. After install I found out the product did not funtion as the employee advertized. I want the business to uninstall and refund me install costs but they state since I bought the unit online that they are not held to what employee said product would do. Do I have any recourse?

 

[tranquility]

Your remedy is with the product manufacturer. If you bought from the store where you got the advice, you could claim a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Here, the worker has no liability to you. The installation, if done correctly, is not going to bring them to being liable for anything.

 

[swalsh411]

I see two scenarios here.

1. The product does not function correctly.

If this is the case and it's due to a faulty product, you would take the issue up with the manufacturer. If the installation was faulty then you take the issue up with the installer.

2. The product does not contain features you through it had.

If this is the case then you may be able to exchange or return the product to wherever you bought it from if allowed by their return policy. You have no cause of action against the installer. It is laughable that you think an installer would be responsible for you not doing your homework on product features. Anytime you are making a major purchase and need to confirm certain features you should also rely on the manufacturer specifications and not what you recall a salesperson told you.

 

[tranquility]

Anytime you are making a major purchase and need to confirm certain features you should also rely on the manufacturer specifications and not what you recall a salesperson told you.

What a person recalls a salesperson told him could create an implied warranty. If so, it's just a matter of proof. Even if the manufacturer specifications differ, if there is the implied warranty, it would be actionable. (But, that is not the case on our facts. There is not an implied warranty that would give relief.)

 

[swalsh411]

What a person recalls a salesperson told him could create an implied warranty. If so, it's just a matter of proof. Even if the manufacturer specifications differ, if there is the implied warranty, it would be actionable. (But, that is not the case on our facts. There is not an implied warranty that would give relief.)

I agree but it's still best to confirm specifications with the manufactuer to avoid the hassle and frustration of buying something only to find out it doesn't have a feature you want.

 

[Zigner]

What a person recalls a salesperson told him could create an implied warranty. If so, it's just a matter of proof. Even if the manufacturer specifications differ, if there is the implied warranty, it would be actionable. (But, that is not the case on our facts. There is not an implied warranty that would give relief.)

It's not the case here because the OP didn't buy the product from the person/entity that gave him incorrect information.

 

[justalayman]

It's not the case here because the OP didn't buy the product from the person/entity that gave him incorrect information.

I think that may be what tranq was referring to in his statement in parenthesis.

Do I have any recourse?

If the entity that sold you the product told you it met your needs, go after them for failing to perform per their implied warranty of fitness for a specific purpose. If they made no such statement, your remedy would be to either deal with what you have or purchase the model that will perform as needed and have that installed (at your cost of course)



realize that you are the person that made the determination that this model would perform as you needed. While you were told by somebody that got nothing out of the deal that that unit would work as you needed, you have no claim against him because he had no duty to provide you with any information, let alone accurate information. He could have lied to you all day long and incurred no liability to you unless he gained from your reliance on his information.

In other words; don't be such a tightwad and try to screw somebody out of a couple bucks by using their own people to screw them out of money. If you had purchased it from the guy that told you it was the correct one, you would have an action for a refund of all the money spent buying and installing the thing.

 

[latigo]

What a person recalls a salesperson told him could create an implied warranty. If so, it's just a matter of proof. Even if the manufacturer specifications differ, if there is the implied warranty, it would be actionable. (But, that is not the case on our facts. There is not an implied warranty that would give relief.)

By definition * any promises, assurances, guarantees made to the purchaser by the seller respecting the quality, suitability, etc., of an item purchased from the seller, whether expressed in writing or verbally, would be treated as EXPRESS WARRANTIES! Not implied.

Implied warranties are those imposed by operation of law. Such as an implied warranty of merchantability and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, which apply only to new merchandise.

 

[justalayman]

By definition * any promises, assurances, guarantees made to the purchaser by the seller respecting the quality, suitability, etc., of an item purchased from the seller, whether expressed in writing or verbally, would be treated as EXPRESS WARRANTIES! Not implied.

Implied warranties are those imposed by operation of law. Such as an implied warranty of merchantability and an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, which apply only to new merchandise.

not following ya here. A statement that the unit chosen did perform as purchaser required is an assurance made by the seller but it creates a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

so, is the warranty of fitness for the app expressed or implied?

 

[tranquility]

I'm not following either.

From the Montana annotated code (mirroring UCC):

30-2-315. Implied warranty -- fitness for particular purpose. Where the seller at the time of contracting has reason to know any particular purpose for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is unless excluded or modified under the next section an implied warranty that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.

There does not seem to be a "new" merchandise requirement. As to the implied/express issue, I don't disagree. We don't have the facts to determine what happened exactly, but we don't need them for the facts we do have. If we happen to have a case someday where there seems an express warranty, I might just throw in the UCC and its terminology too. Let's call it a separate cause of action if it causes one to tingle happily.

 

[latigo]

I'm not following either.

From the Montana annotated code (mirroring UCC):
There does not seem to be a "new" merchandise requirement. As to the implied/express issue, I don't disagree. We don't have the facts to determine what happened exactly, but we don't need them for the facts we do have. If we happen to have a case someday where there seems an express warranty, I might just throw in the UCC and its terminology too. Let's call it a separate cause of action if it causes one to tingle happily.

I didn’t suppose you would confess your mistake in labeling as an “implied warranty”

“What a person recalls a salesperson TOLD him . . .

But I’m at a loss to understand where you find justification for confusing an implied warranty from one expressly made by referencing the UCC when Sections 2-314 and 2-315 are the very laws – and to my understanding the only laws where the UCC has been adopted - that impose warranties upon a sale of goods transaction without the need of direct and explicit expression.

 

[swalsh411]

I heartily concur with the "don't be a tightwad" advice.

 

[tranquility]

I posted the Montana code covering this. It mirrors the UCC, but, since it is the actual state code we have to go by that one. Now, as to the fact as to the type of warranty. First, I think we agree there is no warranty issue HERE. Second, if we pretend the OP bought from the store of the salesman, it really wouldn't make a difference if the warranty is express or implied to determine the OP's remedies. For those interested in theory, let's look at the facts:

I recently entered a store and spoke to an employee about buying a product with specific capabilities. He directed me to one model and told me it did what I wanted.

To me, that pretty much is what the implied warranty is all about. Customer comes in wanting tires for driving in the snow and the salesman points out the correct tire. OP comes in wanting something that has all these capabilities and the salesman tells him the correct widget.

Can we imagine the salesman ALSO said the OP would get 500 Bromligator and 700 Rasta capabilities with the widget too? Sure. If so, that MAY be an express warranty too. What is the express warranty here on our facts? Say the device works for the purposes the OP told the salesman about but only produces 499 Bromligators, what result? Say the Bromligator and Rasta numbers are fine, but the device does not work for the purposes the OP told the salesman about, what result?

 

[MT143]

I appreciate everyones feedback. It sounds like I have no claim so I will not pursue this any further. To address the "tightwad" comment, I am not trying to pickpocket here. I only want the business to hold its employees accountable for their representations and I was frustrated by the lack of sympathy shown by the manager. I agree that the ultimate seller of this item made no capability representations to me and so I have to live with what I purchased. Again, thanks for the advice.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

It is the managers job to show sympathy for customers making purchases of merchandise from them. It is not their job to be sympathetic to persons wasting their salespersons time, to make purchases elsewhere. I don't suppose you offered to pay for the salesperson wages whiles you were picking their brain to purchase elsewhere!!!