RMAing a 4870x2

[irashi]

So I've been trying to RMA my HiS 4870x2 for a while now. It's been artifacting like crazy, causing BSODs and driver crashes alike (although the driver crashes are more common than the BSODs). Even had a period where I was blue screening on boot, although I ended up getting that sorted out.

HiS' RMA process is interesting. It involves a generic request form on their website, which sends you a PDF form to email or fax to the USA to get processed. Now as I live in the UK, this would have meant for a bit of an inconvenience r.e. actually getting hold of them, so I rang Scan to:

a) check the warranty on the card
b) getting the card RMAed through Scan as I purchased from them.

Ringing up, it turns out that my card has a years warranty, which was a tad annoying, as it meant that I couldn't actually get it RMAed. Thinking about it though, a years warranty seems a bit piddly, considering many come with three, five, or even lifetime warranties. Luckily, I guess, I'm covered under the Sales of Goods Act.

I honestly imagine that a GPU isn't designed to burn out in a year and a half, and as such, isn't really of satisfactory quality. Under the act, that's pretty clearly classified as the product not being of satisfactory quality, and as such I would be entitled to a repair or replacement under the SoGA. I sent Scan a friendly email explaining this, and that I would like a repair or replacement.

I can honestly say I wasn't expecting to be brushed off in such a brusque manner.

To make a claim under the sales of goods act you would at this stage need to prove the item contained an inherant fault, without this evidence you have no legal right to any redress at this stage as you have no warranty, no have no claim under that either.

This left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I was under the impression that I didn't need to physically prove that an inherent fault (because that would be silly). Don't get me wrong, it's worked fine for the past 1.5 years, so it's not glaringly defective, but saying that seemed rather...odd. I was under the impression that it was acceptable to show that the item did not fail due to damage caused and that it failed in an unreasonably short time.

Am I right in what I have done? Is there anything else I can do? I'm a bit stumped.

[jim]

If you ask for a replacement within 6 months, it's assumed that the fault is inherent. We're well beyond 6 months now, so that is irrelevant.

Beyond that date, you would need to have it tested by an engineer deemed appropriate (I would assume that means: qualified and impartial) by a court of law, and hope that they find it to be the result of an inherent fault.

For the amount of money we're talking to get it tested, probably not worth the hassle. I would, personally, see what Scan say in reply to this thread, and if they aren't interested, flog it on eBay as faulty.

EDIT: Oops, nobody except Scan employees are allowed to post in this forum. You won't get any advice from anybody as a result, with the thread here. Anyway, apologies to Scan - came in via new posts and didn't notice the forum. Info is factual though.