Magnuson-Moss warranty act is a spell that safeguards the rights of both the consumer and the household. It not only explains the role of active consumer participation and relevance but also tries to keep the standards of goods and products above par. It majors on the issues about warranty on goods and outputs as it governs warranties as well as the consumer goods.
From the case of Gloria, it is clear that she stands a fair hearing – a standing for her rug to either be fixed, repaired or a new one given to her. Such is the effect of the warranty act of Magnuson – Moss that advocates for consumer rights and fights for the households in any given market. From the above warranty laws, it is clear that when any product is within the warranty duration, any breakage or damage of any product deserves a repair or a repurchase as a substitute. Gloria suffers the same fate and needs to get a just treatment towards her spoilt rug which is still within the warranty duration and timing.
From a different perspective, it is very clear that the rag cost more than ten dollars, which is also against the postulates of the Magnuson – Moss Warranty Act. From the above postulate, it is therefore, of goodwill for Gloria to get her rug replaced since its pricing even went overboard. Overcharging is an offense according to the warranty and any product sold higher than ten dollars should not be sold to individuals. Such are the views and arguments that put Gloria on a safe side making her be in a position to get fair hearing and receive justice in as far as her rug is concerned.
The warranty cat clearly states that the consumers are free from over pricing and underhanded marketing deals (Rich, 2003). Gloria gets a rug at a higher cost and then the rug spoils within the warranty duration. The act serves as an advocate for such cases in attempts to fight and stand in for consumers and households such that their market-related complaints regarding pricing and warranty positions get heard and an affirmative action taken to revert. It is through the act that consumers have a voice and get goods at a relatively lower and manageable price to cater for a majority of households. Such is a practice that inhibits greed from sellers as well as exploitation and manipulation of the consumers from the individual sellers of any kind. Gloria as a consumer has a right to obtain any product at a fair price not at a price the rag cost. That was not a very favorable pricing for her hence her need to get her rag issue fixed one more time so that she too enjoys the benefits of a consumer protected atmosphere.
“Magnuson–Moss Act was enacted by Congress in response to the widespread misuse by merchants of express warranties and disclaimers. The legislative history indicates that the purpose of the Act is to make warranties on consumer products more readily understood and enforceable and to provide the means to protect consumers better.” (Horvath, 2009) – Consumer Lawsuit of 1999 in the United States of America
It is also of sound mind and logical to deal in products that are durable and that can withstand any condition and still stay for long. From the case involving Gloria, it seems the rug she was sold to be not durable enough as it did not take long before it got spoilt through an attack by molds from moisture. There are very clear indications that most likely the rug sold to her did not meet the required standards of goods and products hence not durable and of low quality. The effect of such dubious deals is that consumer gets to spend funds and later get disappointed. It is the user who stands s to lose from fake sales. Gloria, therefore, stands a chance to be sorted out, and her rag issue is sorted out and even replaced so that she also gets to enjoy as a consumer who forms part and parcel of the warranty act postulates. The warranty takes along the idea of free consumer exploited market, and it also regards transparency as well as honesty in markets.
Gloria as customer needs her rug fixed and even a rug obtained for her to totally clean up the mess and restore the consumer protection act and make the law effective. She is innocent and falls a victim of malicious marketing activity as she gets the fake rag that is not durable, and her warrant seems not to be regarded as important. She not only needs her rug fixed as per the acts of the Magnuson – Moss Warranty Act but also requires a fair consideration as a consumer who is protected by law. “The statute is remedial in nature and is intended to protect consumers from deceptive warranty practices”(Miller, 2010) – A case of Bauhaus Mobile Homes, Inc. versus a limited company in the United States in 1982.
The consumer gets exploited from false advertisement, poor quality of goods, as well as lack proper follow-up of warranty, entails. Bodies and acts like the Bureau of Standards, Magnuson –Moss acts among others stand in for consumers and other households to see that their rights get safeguarded and that there is no exploitation.
Horvath, A., Villafranco, J., Calkins, S., & American Bar Association. (2009). Consumer protection law developments. Chicago, IL: ABA Section of Antitrust Law.
Miller, R. L. R., & Jentz, G. A. (2010). Fundamentals of business law: Excerpted cases. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Rich, C. (2003). Corporate counsel’s primer on the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Chesterland, Ohio: Business Laws Inc.