What's the problem with providing receipts?

[Bronal]

The new template for For Sale ads asks whether the original receipt for the item is available.  I've noticed that the answer to this is usually 'no', even if the item is near new and the seller states that they are the original owner.  Receipts are rarely offered.  In one case a pair of very expensive speakers is offered in sealed boxes but without a receipt.

 

What is the problem with providing a receipt?  Surely people aren't discarding them, as they are required for warranty claims.

 

If this question on the template is of so little use as to be ignored by most people, then perhaps is should be deleted as it adds nothing to the sale.

[Grimmie]

Whilst it is unlikely that the item is stolen and therefore receipts are not available, it may be that the seller is unwilling to divulge the actual cost of the brand new item as opposed to the current or last published RRP. You are right @Bronal in that people are unlikely to discard the receipts and therefore it would be a real plus to the purchaser to be able to see them and verify whether he is sharing in the initial bargain.

[muon*]

The original receipt is for the original purchaser.

 

Want the receipt, buy new.

[POV]

I always provide receipts for items I sell or gift.  I just write on it and initial the details of the sale and the new owner.

[Grimmie]

Fair enough @muon* supply and demand determine an items worth, we all know that.

As long as the seller does not quote in their ad an RRP of $5,000.00 if the cupboard dwelling receipt says $3,900.00 that's dangerously close to rank deception.

(Yes, I know buyer beware. Caveat Emptor and all that.)

Edited October 9, 2024 by Grimmie

[Dystoria]

If the item is under warranty and it's transferrable then it makes sense, at least to me, to want the receipt. 

[muon*]

5 minutes ago, Dystoria said:

If the item is under warranty and it's transferrable then it makes sense, at least to me, to want the receipt. 

In that situation I could understand it, often it is not.

[muon*]

6 minutes ago, Grimmie said:

Fair enough @muon* supply and demand determine an items worth, we all know that.

As long as the seller does not quote in their ad an RRP of $5,000.00 if the cupboard dwelling receipt says $3,900.00 that's dangerously close to rank deception.

(Yes, I know buyer beware. Caveat Emptor and all that.)

I'd be surprised if most people do not understand what the RRP represents, and how it can differ from the street price in some cases.

[Bronal]

56 minutes ago, muon* said:

The original receipt is for the original purchaser.

 

Not always.  If the item is still under a transferable warranty (and don't forget that many pieces of equipment now come with quite lengthy warranties) then the original receipt is essential in the event of a warranty claim.  And if the seller mentions a warranty in the ad, then they are, IMO, required to produce a receipt to back it up.

[Peter_F]

Perhaps some people are concerned about providing their name, address, phone and credit card information that maybe included on the receipt? It may be concerning with the manner and frequency at which hifi is on sold and shipped the around the country you don't know who or how many people will end up with that information or where it could end up.  

[muon*]

43 minutes ago, Bronal said:

 

Not always.  If the item is still under a transferable warranty (and don't forget that many pieces of equipment now come with quite lengthy warranties) then the original receipt is essential in the event of a warranty claim.  And if the seller mentions a warranty in the ad, then they are, IMO, required to produce a receipt to back it up.

I already agreed with Dystoria on the subject of transferable warranties.

 

If I'm not mistaken these are an exception to the rule, and most are not transferable.

[Kirby66]

If a seller claims to be the original owner of an item with a value above perhaps a couple of hundred bucks, less than a few years old, and I did not know them or anyone who would vouch for their honesty, I just wouldn't give their claim of being the original owner any weight in the decision to buy or not.

 

If the seller claims to be the original owner and is able to provide an invoice / receipt that validates their claim the purchaser can attribute whatever value they choose be it $$ or confidence.

 

Transferable warranties are indeed the exception but they do exist, entirely at the discretion of the manufacturer, and in the case that the buyer wants to be protected under that warranty they should clarify it directly with the manufacturer prior to sale then have the manufacturer transfer the warranty details to their name post sale - I have done this with audio and non-audio products.

 

I think it's acceptable to obscure information that relates to personal security on documents. It is also acceptable to obscure the price paid with the understanding that to do so clearly shows that the RRP was not the price paid. What the seller actually paid for the item, be it new or second hand, should be of little consequence to the buyer ... the thing is only worth what someone is prepared to pay for it today. There are plenty of people buying and selling second hand goods to make a profit. Stating an RRP in a SNA Classified Ad is not saying that's what the seller paid it is just that ... the Recommended Retail Price of the item new (whether it's the RRP at the current date or at the date it was originally sold is another matter).

 

9 hours ago, POV said:

I just write on it and initial the details of the sale and the new owner.

 

A very good practice Drew  - anyone providing an original receipt with a sale should do the same 

 

 

[DazzS]

This is a really useful discussion, especially for a newbie like me. I'm planning to list an item for sale here soon that is still under warranty and I had assumed it would be transferable so this has been enlightening.

[sir sanders zingmore]

8 hours ago, muon* said:

I already agreed with Dystoria on the subject of transferable warranties.

 

If I'm not mistaken these are an exception to the rule, and most are not transferable.

That’s my understanding too. I think people often think that receipts are transferrable without actually first checking 

[paulk]

       I like to include the receipt as "available", when I'm selling something reasonably new particularly if its still under warranty, whether transferable or not, as I think it proves to perspective buyers you're fair dinkum and they can feel more comfortable with the purchase.   Knowing there's a proof of purchase/ownership; dealer; date; price info etc.  definitely makes buyers more confident. I know it does for me. 

          My point being, it aids in the sale of your item particularly if it's a fairly expensive piece.

 

           People should really know whether their items warranty is transferable or not. Perspective buyers could do their own research and find that information for themselves but it really looks better coming from the seller to me.    

 

           I guess some don't want to reveal the price they've paid, if bought on sale etc, as they may be hoping to get similar or more than its original cost.  I guess that's up to the individual to decide if that's unconscionable or not.

 

         Anyway these are just my thoughts, everyone sees things differently. 

           

[POV]

1 hour ago, sir sanders zingmore said:

That’s my understanding too. I think people often think that receipts are transferrable without actually first checking 

 

It’s a complicated area of law for sure. Ultimately though, it’s arguable that all manufacturers’ warranties are provided by the manufacturer and exist irrespective of who owns or is in possession of the equipment. I.e., your legal responsibilities as a manufacturer don’t cease to exist as soon as the item has changed hands for warranting the product (in the same way as they don’t cease to exist for product safety). So, if an item fails during its warrantable period (or even outside of warranty but within a reasonable fair use period), then you would most likely win any pursuit for warranty if you had the wherewithal to chase it. This is likely the case irrespective of whether or not the item’s warranty is explicitly stated as being transferable or not. For the most part, under law this is irrelevant.

 

To this discussion though, proof of purchase is associated with the contract of sale between the retailer and the purchaser. Certainly, the original retailer of a subsequently sold item bears no responsibility after it is resold or gifted, and consequently, the proof of purchase is of very limited value, beyond identifying the original purchase date (though in the case of fair use, this is largely irrelevant anyway).

 

My wife is a lawyer that works for ACCC.  We have never lost a warranty claim including many claimed well outside the warranty indicated with the purchase.

 

Edited October 9, 2024 by POV

[Mendes]

18 hours ago, Bronal said:

If this question on the template is of so little use as to be ignored by most people, then perhaps is should be deleted as it adds nothing to the sale.

I agree with you, it should be deleted, and as said earlier by @muon* - buy new if you want a receipt and the safety of a warranty.

Second hand is discounted against new pricing for a reason, particularly in the current market where you need to discount by 50-60% or more from RRP.

 

I pay more attention to who I am buying from and their feedback history.

 

YMMV 

[muon*]

30 minutes ago, POV said:

Ultimately though, it’s arguable that all manufacturers’ warranties are provided by the manufacturer and exist irrespective of who owns or is in possession of the equipment.

Good luck claiming on that basis, you will need it.

[Grimmie]

I would be against the deleting of the receipt available field as it is an aid to whether the seller has complete transparency in his dealing with you. That's not to say you're automatically a shyster if you don't provide it, but we don't know most on here from a bar of soap (though being a long SNA poster gives some indication as to genuine intent) and they could easily be dodgy dealers flipping goods and making a mint from it.

Of course, if you want the item and are prepared to pay regardless this is moot.

It also demonstrates it is not a grey import.

Edited October 9, 2024 by Grimmie

[muon*]

This "issue" is looking like a storm in a tea cup.

 

Most used gear is second, third or forth hand.

[POV]

12 minutes ago, muon* said:

Good luck claiming on that basis, you will need it.

 

My wife deals with this stuff all day every day.  You'd be surprised how many people win warranty claims (including second and third owners direct with the manufacturer) The main issue I think is that it's an area that's not well understood and people take the words provided in a warranty statement as literal when under the law they are essentially irrelevant.   But as I said in my post you need the wherewihal to chase, and potentially take the retailer and/or manufacturer to the relevant tribunal or seek support from ACCC which most people don't bother with.  Depends how much it means to you and how much time you have to invest.  Some people take a very principled approach and will throw hundreds of hours at chasing a few thousand dollars.  This doesn't make sense to me, but each to their own.

 

Anyways key point is that the proof of purchase for the original buyer is only really relevant to the contract of sale between the retailer and the buyer.  Once the item has been sold or gifted the original reciept is of very limited value with any potential warranty claims that the subsequent owner may seek to make with the manufacturer.

Edited October 9, 2024 by POV

[Satanica]

13 hours ago, Grimmie said:

...therefore it would be a real plus to the purchaser to be able to see them and verify whether he is sharing in the initial bargain.

 

Why should a second hand sale necessarily be a 'bargain'? And for just a 'he' for that matter?

[Grimmie]

Good point, and....good point.

[aussievintage]

13 hours ago, Grimmie said:

and verify whether he is sharing in the initial bargain.

 

14 minutes ago, Satanica said:

Why should a second hand sale necessarily be a 'bargain'?

 

I agree.

 

 

Why should he/she "share" the initial bargain?    If I get myself a good bargain, the item is still worth whatever it's worth when I sell it.  That could even mean I get some profit.  That's not immoral.

[Antipodean Brad]

I'd love the ACCC to clearly state if a manufacturer has any legal standing to say that a warranty applies only to the original owner, or not.

 

Accuphase, for one, states this in their warranties, and if this does not have any standing in Australian consumer law then they should cease and desist doing so.

 

One value of a receipt is the date when the item first sold.  It may have been when the product was a current product, or it could have been a NOS item first sold perhaps 10 years after manufacturing ceased.  If the item later sells, say 5 years later, it is 15 years old.  Would a warranty still apply?  I know that this is an extreme case, but I mention it for the sake of consideration.  I have seen an item on ebay which reminded me of this scenario, so I thought it may be relevant. 

Edited October 10, 2024 by Antipodean Brad
spelling error