The law that everyone who buys things should know about - but too many don’t
Tuesday, 28 July 2026
Martin Hawes is a financial writer and presenter, and has written 25 personal finance books. He writes a weekly column.
OPINION: First there was my wet suit: when I went back to collect it after the second lot of repairs, I was told it was out of warranty and the manufacturer would not cover the cost of repair. I replied that the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 applied and that my comeback was with the retailer who sold it to me, not the manufacturer. The shop keeper shrugged his shoulders and, being in a hurry to go for a swim and needing the wetsuit, I paid (I should not have!).
Second was the microwave that I was buying. Having chosen the right one I went to the counter. An “assistant” rather diffidently asked me if I would like an extended warranty. I had thought that extended warranties had died off years ago. I gave the “assistant” an earful about the Consumer Guarantees Act and the fact that extended warranties were usually unnecessary – she slunk away leaving me with the distinct impression that she knew she was trying to sell something with little benefit, but that was her job.
Third was my chair, which had developed a habit of spontaneously trying to dismantle itself. I got someone to put it back together but soon after he fixed it, the chair started to unravel again. After the now standard discussion of them saying it was out of warranty and me quoting a few bits of the Consumers Guarantees Act, a man with a screwdriver might appear sometime soon. (To be fair, it is a complicated chair and no easy thing to fix. However, a $3500 chair ought to last longer than five years.)
The three examples show a pattern: both the public and in some instances the retailer do not know, and certainly do not apply, the Consumer Guarantees Act.
Read more:
The public should know that the Consumer Guarantees Act trumps a warranty. No matter what a warranty says, and no matter when the warranty ends, the Consumers Guarantee Act applies. Any goods that you buy must be acceptable quality and last a reasonable time: a wet suit should last for more than two seasons, a microwave should last more than a year, and a reasonable person would think I could still sit comfortably on a chair that I bought five years ago.
I know I am a one-person sample, but my guess is that we have a problem with both the public and some businesses not knowing the very basics of this important piece of law for consumer rights. Some businesses are exploiting the public’s ignorance, and other businesses don’t even know what they don’t know.
If the microwave, wet suit, chair or any other items are bought from a business and fail before a reasonable time, it does not matter that the warranty has expired – the company who sold it is liable to repair, replace or refund.
Often the people on the floor of shops are trained to do little more than cash and wrap – they are frequently part-time, and by no means professional retailers. Nevertheless, it is certain that senior management at least know that extended warranties are unnecessary for most.
Extended warranties may be useful for cars and can be offered for any goods provided there are additional benefits to the buyer. These benefits must be disclosed in writing and compared with the benefits of the Consumer Guarantees Act.
The goods that you buy have to be fit for purpose and should last a reasonable time. Even if the warranty says that it is for one year, the goods need to be of acceptable quality and durable (given the purpose for which they are sold).
Ultimately, what is reasonable will be determined by a court; most commonly the Disputes Tribunal which is well practised in dealing with such disputes. Reasonable quality is generally assessed in terms of price, brand/type and usage; if you buy a cheap little lawnmower and use it to mow your 60 acres of weeds down by the swamp, a reasonable person might expect that it will fail pretty soon. However, if you only use it to cut the small lawn at your townhouse, you ought to get years of use.
The Consumer Guarantees Act is an excellent piece of legislation that we have had for over 30 years. However, I think it is time for government to have a major campaign to inform (or perhaps, remind) people of it. This act provides the backbone of fair markets and commerce, and a strong message on the fundamental principles of the Consumer Guarantees Act would be timely.
Martin Hawes is not a financial adviser and the information and opinions here should not be taken as financial advice.